Attached is a modified version of p9p yacc that
supports the Go grammar. I'll be sending a
version of Plan 9 yacc later today.
The following is a description of the changes.
1. The %error-verbose directive is ignored.
2. A description of the final grammar is
printed before the state
Pretty cool!
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 1:10 PM, Anthony Martin al...@pbrane.org wrote:
Attached is a modified version of p9p yacc that
supports the Go grammar. I'll be sending a
version of Plan 9 yacc later today.
The following is a description of the changes.
1. The %error-verbose
Perhaps I'am way off base but surely the neatest solution would be to
modify yacc to produce a nice clean message format, modify the gc
to use that format.
The reason for not using just the same format blindly is it was designed
with the structure of gc in mind rather than a clean output format.
that's what i said ...
If all the information is available in y.output then surely modifying
yacc will cut out the middle man.
brucee
On 13 November 2011 21:08, Steve Simon st...@quintile.net wrote:
Perhaps I'am way off base but surely the neatest solution would be to
modify yacc to produce a
The bisonerrors script is 124 lines. This email thread is now 724
lines. I figure when the number of lines of this thread is 10x the
size of the bisonerrors script it would be nice to replace the endless
discussion with some code :-)
ron
Let me get this straight. The goal is to get a successful full native build
of go under plan9. Currently, the build requires bison which no one wants
to port to plan9 but can be run via linuxemu. Brucee has offered to modify
his limbo version of yacc to make things work but that yacc will then
Reread what I posted. I said that I will modify yacc for different
reasons and gave my reasons for doing so. I NEVER said RUN INFERNO.
Yes ron, what a lot of noise. And I'll SHOUT whenever I think it might
help, Mr aptly named Scatomancer.
brucee
On 14 November 2011 09:30, Scato Logic
If all the information is available in y.output then surely modifying
yacc will cut out the middle man.
On my list.
brucee
On 12 November 2011 20:23, Bakul Shah ba...@bitblocks.com wrote:
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 12:54:28 PST Bakul Shah ba...@bitblocks.com wrote:
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 08:07:21 PST
Go is pretty solid on 386 and I'm slowly puzzling my way through NIX support.
One thing that stands in the way of full native build is the bison issue.
If somebody wants to look at enhancing yacc so that the extra bison
bits can be supported, that would probably do the trick. I have no
idea of
On Fri Nov 11 11:08:13 EST 2011, rminn...@gmail.com wrote:
Go is pretty solid on 386 and I'm slowly puzzling my way through NIX support.
One thing that stands in the way of full native build is the bison issue.
If somebody wants to look at enhancing yacc so that the extra bison
bits can be
I believe go can be tweeked a little build correctly without
bison, but some of the error messages gc generates will be less
helpful.
for me the best solution would be for yacc to be modified
to produce the error message tables directly, rather than
mimicing bison - producing a debug file withch
i'm well aware we can tweak go and remove better error messages. that
doesn't count IMHO. We're working to get to the point where we don't
tweak the go source at all and it just builds. I don't see the point
in making a go for Plan 9 that is in some way compromised. So, getting
back to my original
i'm well aware we can tweak go and remove better error messages. that
doesn't count IMHO. We're working to get to the point where we don't
tweak the go source at all and it just builds. I don't see the point
in making a go for Plan 9 that is in some way compromised. So, getting
back to my
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 08:07:21 PST ron minnich rminn...@gmail.com wrote:
If somebody wants to look at enhancing yacc so that the extra bison
bits can be supported, that would probably do the trick. I have no
idea of the level of effort, I have not looked.
After some googling I see that
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 12:54 PM, Bakul Shah ba...@bitblocks.com wrote:
Might it be worth looking Merr or iyacc? Porting bison to
plan9 seems like a hugh punishment for a quick hack:-)
Implementing Jeffery's directly in yacc might benefit other
parsers as well.
If it's worth a look then I
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 12:58:30 PST ron minnich rminn...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 12:54 PM, Bakul Shah ba...@bitblocks.com wrote:
Might it be worth looking Merr or iyacc? Porting bison to
plan9 seems like a hugh punishment for a quick hack:-)
Implementing Jeffery's directly
One further issue is whether go has any other bison
dependencies.
as off march (when I last played with a port) it didn't,
there where a few bits of bison syntax which are different
in yacc but these could be papered over whith a few lines of
sed - ur yacc could even be taught this alternative
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 6:54 PM, Bakul Shah ba...@bitblocks.com wrote:
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 08:07:21 PST ron minnich rminn...@gmail.com wrote:
If somebody wants to look at enhancing yacc so that the extra bison
bits can be supported, that would probably do the trick. I have no
idea of the
18 matches
Mail list logo
