On 5 Jul 2007, at 16:26, Gary Funck wrote:
Hans, thanks for the follow-up. I noticed after the fact that I didn't modify my current %union definition to the form where it held the storage for the binary data within the node itself. To clarify, the defintion should have been: %union { uda_tword_t val; uda_tword_t val2[2]; uda_tint_t signed_val; uda_taddr_t addr_val; uda_debugger_pts_t pts; char *str; uda_binary_data_t data; } where uda_binary_data_t is defined as:
One idea of using %union is to save space, so it would no longer apply with your definition, as the "union" takes up at least the size of its smallest member.
Hans Aberg _______________________________________________ help-bison@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-bison