> > > So far, there's no way to get a modular description of the grammar. > There is definitely interest for it, but a clean solution remains > to be designed.
Why is it so? Is because the grammar spec usually is not a DAG? But there should be ways to introduce more nodes to make a non DAG to DAG, is it? I'm worried though: this file is has plenty of K&R C, yet Bison > generates parsers in ANSI C. Am I missing something? The rest code of bash seem to be in K&R style. Maybe the authors want the style to be consistent? -- Regards, Peng _______________________________________________ [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-bison
