On Mar 24, 10:19 pm, Franck Pommereau <[email protected]>
wrote:
> > I don't recall, but I think an argument could be made either way for
> > not resetting it. For instance, you might want to do some kind of
> > incremental feed-parsing into the lexer. Open to ideas.
>
> Why not add a boolean argument (with default value to preserve existing
> code) to specify which behaviour is desired?
>
This isn't simple, as ply.yacc calls ply.lex.input() itself, and
passing an argument through them doesn't seem clean.
I agree with Dave on the flexibility matter. Since it's easy to reset
the line manually when required, I think the current implementation is
just fine.
Eli
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"ply-hack" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/ply-hack?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
