On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 12:23:37AM +0200, Hans Aberg wrote:
>
> > On 26 Sep 2014, at 21:58, Bob Rossi wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 03:37:18PM +0200, Hans Aberg wrote:
>
> >>> The %destructor for result and result_list does not call free, but
> >>> instead calls gdbmi_result_free. gdbm
> On 26 Sep 2014, at 21:58, Bob Rossi wrote:
>
> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 03:37:18PM +0200, Hans Aberg wrote:
>>> The %destructor for result and result_list does not call free, but
>>> instead calls gdbmi_result_free. gdbmi_result_free free's the result
>>> (including the variable member of the
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 03:37:18PM +0200, Hans Aberg wrote:
> > On 26 Sep 2014, at 03:31, Bob Rossi wrote:
>
> > A secondary concern I had with %destructor is how it worked when lists
> > are used in the bison grammar. I'm concerned about a double free. For
> > instance,
> >result_list: {
> >
> On 26 Sep 2014, at 03:31, Bob Rossi wrote:
> A secondary concern I had with %destructor is how it worked when lists
> are used in the bison grammar. I'm concerned about a double free. For
> instance,
>result_list: {
> $$ = NULL;
>};
>
>result_list: result_list COMMA result {
