Martin Walch <walch.mar...@web.de> writes:
> On Wednesday 02 October 2013 08:57:54 Yann E. MORIN wrote:
>> On Wednesday 02 October 2013 08:42:59 Dirk Gouders wrote:
>> > I think you should also regenerate the scanner and add
>> > the new zconf.lex.c_shipped to this patch.
>>
>> I think sending the re-generated parser as a separate patch helps
>> in reviewing. Ie. I'd prefer a fifth patch.
>>
>> BTW, regenerating the parser can be done with:
>> make REGENERATE_PARSERS=1 config
>
> Actually, I regenerated the scanner. However, the results did not change
> after applying the patch, because the definition that the patch removes
> (ws) is not used anywhere. It is only a cleanup.
Sorry, my review was too superficial.
I did downgrade my flex to see if your changes affect the scanner,
but I did not test it without your patch and also did not have a look in
what the changes are.
The changes I noticed here are probably related to the flex package I
use (on a Gentoo system) -- they even occur without your patch. I'll
attach what I noticed in case someone is interested.
Dirk
diff --git a/scripts/kconfig/zconf.lex.c_shipped
b/scripts/kconfig/zconf.lex.c_shipped
index a0521aa..3eb4c0b 100644
--- a/scripts/kconfig/zconf.lex.c_shipped
+++ b/scripts/kconfig/zconf.lex.c_shipped
@@ -920,7 +920,7 @@ static int input (void );
/* This used to be an fputs(), but since the string might contain NUL's,
* we now use fwrite().
*/
-#define ECHO do { if (fwrite( zconftext, zconfleng, 1, zconfout )) {} } while
(0)
+#define ECHO fwrite( zconftext, zconfleng, 1, zconfout )
#endif
/* Gets input and stuffs it into "buf". number of characters read, or YY_NULL,
