On 15 Jan 2013, at 03:48, Adam Smalin wrote:
> As we know in C++ there is a issue...
You might inquiry in the Usenet newsgroup comp.compilers. There is a Yaccable
C++ grammar for an older revision, it may not have been updated.
http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lite/yaccable-grammar.html
Hans
:-) Well done.
Those comments weren't there ten years ago.
On 28 January 2013 18:17, Akim Demaille wrote:
>
> Le 28 janv. 2013 à 18:14, "John P. Hartmann" a écrit :
>
>> Thank you for the clarification. I see.
>>
>> I guess I am handicapped by having converted the parser code to /360
>> assem
Le 28 janv. 2013 à 18:14, "John P. Hartmann" a écrit :
> Thank you for the clarification. I see.
>
> I guess I am handicapped by having converted the parser code to /360
> assembler language.
You are one of a kind :)
> Others might have studied the skeleton code. Maybe a comment to the
> ef
Thank you for the clarification. I see.
I guess I am handicapped by having converted the parser code to /360
assembler language.
Others might have studied the skeleton code. Maybe a comment to the
effect that one should forget having seen this assignment?
On 28 January 2013 18:02, Akim Demaill
Le 28 janv. 2013 à 17:11, John P. Hartmann a écrit :
> On 28 January 2013 16:43, John P. Hartmann wrote:
>> But here is another one:
>>
>> | dotobyfors dotobyfor { listend($1, $2); }
>>
>> Gets "warning: unset value: $$".
>>
>> I'm relying on the default $$ = $1 here.
>>
>> O
Adding $$ = $1 kept Bison quiet.
Here is a variation that gets Unused value $1.
assign : variable ASSIGN expression
{
$$->term.oper = op_assign;
This is also fixed by stating the default action.
Surely this is a bug (?).
On 28 January 2013 16:43,
But here is another one:
| dotobyfors dotobyfor { listend($1, $2); }
Gets "warning: unset value: $$".
I'm relying on the default $$ = $1 here.
Or is there something more subtle going on? Or (shudder) is the
default applied only when there is no explicit semantic code? (In
whic
Thanks, Akim.
Right, so it is the presence of a destructor that enables this
checking. Might it be worth mentioning in the documentation?
The example in 3.8.7 shows how to use
%destructor { }
it probably confused me. The explanation certainly doesn't tell me
all the ramifications.
-
Tr
Hi John,
Le 28 janv. 2013 à 12:41, John P. Hartmann a écrit :
> I have a fine grammar, but I get unset value warnings in droves when I add
> empty %destructor declartions (the error token is not [yet] referenced).
>
> This applies to Bison 2.5 on Fedora 17 and also 2.4.1 on Fedora13.
>
> %union
I have a fine grammar, but I get unset value warnings in droves when I add
empty %destructor declartions (the error token is not [yet] referenced).
This applies to Bison 2.5 on Fedora 17 and also 2.4.1 on Fedora13.
%union
{
struct instruction * inst;
struct expression * exp;
struct term
10 matches
Mail list logo
