On Wednesday 01 November 2006 00:44, Joel E. Denny wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Oct 2006, Joel E. Denny wrote:
> > I think I'm seeing it your way at least as far as these mid-rule warnings
> > are concerned. Looking at it from another angle, while it's probably ok
> > to warn about potentially dangerous us
en --warnings=midrule-values is
+# set.
m4_define([AT_CHECK_UNUSED_VALUES],
[AT_DATA([input.y],
@@ -116,19 +118,19 @@ l: INT | INT { $$ = $1
_AT_UNUSED_VALUES_DECLARATIONS])
)
-AT_CHECK([bison input.y], [0], [],
+AT_CHECK([bison]m4_ifval($2, [ --warnings=midrule-values ])[ input.y], [0], [],
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006, Hans Aberg wrote:
> On 27 Oct 2006, at 07:59, Joel E. Denny wrote:
>
> > I'd rather choose a global default (mid-rule warnings on or off) and then
> > let the user specify otherwise either globally (-W) or case-by-case (USE).
>
> The way I reason is that a package distributi
On 27 Oct 2006, at 07:59, Joel E. Denny wrote:
I'd rather choose a global default (mid-rule warnings on or off)
and then
let the user specify otherwise either globally (-W) or case-by-case
(USE).
The way I reason is that a package distribution should normally not
issue any warnings - just
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Then again, I try to
> > avoid mid-rules, $0, and $-n, so maybe I don't have the right feel for
> > this.
> maybe disable the check completely if $0 or $-n is used.
That's an interesting possibility. However, I worry that there are cases
where
On Friday 27 October 2006 00:12, you wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > in semantic actions at any level in the parse tree. Bison would have
> > > to check every possible expansion of every possible RHS symbol. That
> > > implementation seems like more work than I want to
On Thu, 26 Oct 2006, Hans Aberg wrote:
> On 26 Oct 2006, at 22:55, Joel E. Denny wrote:
>
> > What if we simply add an option to turn this warning off globally?
>
> It was this warning tricking me into believe there was something funny about
> $0. So I think it should by default be off, unless o
On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > in semantic actions at any level in the parse tree. Bison would have to
> > check every possible expansion of every possible RHS symbol. That
> > implementation seems like more work than I want to do.
> ... but how hard would it be to check just o
On 26 Oct 2006, at 16:49, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
be guaranteed, in view of that Bison is switching to other types of
containers than an underlying array.
but should the container still support the $0 notation ?
that did not come out right, should have read
...but surely the new containers wi
On 26 Oct 2006, at 22:55, Joel E. Denny wrote:
What if we simply add an option to turn this warning off globally?
It was this warning tricking me into believe there was something
funny about $0. So I think it should by default be off, unless one is
choosing finicky mode, as on other compil
On Thursday 26 October 2006 22:55, Joel E. Denny wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > That is, do you believe this warning is too much trouble to be
> > > worthwhile?
> >
> > The warning would be ok, if it was only true.
>
> It's true inasmuch as we specifically intended to w
On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > That is, do you believe this warning is too much trouble to be
> > worthwhile?
> The warning would be ok, if it was only true.
It's true inasmuch as we specifically intended to warn about the current
rule's actions without regard to other rules
On Thursday 26 October 2006 21:35, Joel E. Denny wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > On Thursday 26 October 2006 20:45, Joel E. Denny wrote:
> > > On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > > On Thursday 26 October 2006 02:27, Joel E. Denny wrote:
> > >
> > > That's ni
On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Thursday 26 October 2006 20:45, Joel E. Denny wrote:
> > On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > On Thursday 26 October 2006 02:27, Joel E. Denny wrote:
>
> > That's nice. I'm wondering why the grammar doesn't use $-1 and drop the
> >
On Thursday 26 October 2006 20:45, Joel E. Denny wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > On Thursday 26 October 2006 02:27, Joel E. Denny wrote:
> That's nice. I'm wondering why the grammar doesn't use $-1 and drop the
> mid-rule entirely, but I haven't test this. I'm thinking
On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Thursday 26 October 2006 02:27, Joel E. Denny wrote:
> > > Line 873 contains: |??procoptionlist ',' {$$=$1;} procoption {$$=$1;}
> > > $3 refers to the embedded action after the comma.
> >
> > In the last semantic action above, write:
> >
> > ? USE
On Thursday 26 October 2006 10:41, Akim Demaille wrote:
> >>> "Hans" == Hans Aberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> [Just passing by, no time for more :( ]
>
> > It was before I recalling you showing up on the list. Probably Bug-
> > Bison. Perhaps Akim or Paul can inform the truth about $0.
>
> I
On Thursday 26 October 2006 02:27, Joel E. Denny wrote:
> > Line 873 contains: | procoptionlist ',' {$$=$1;} procoption {$$=$1;}
> > $3 refers to the embedded action after the comma.
>
> In the last semantic action above, write:
>
> USE($3)
>
> > My grammar set a number of attributes in an alloc
On Wednesday 25 October 2006 23:35, Hans Aberg wrote:
> >> be guaranteed, in view of that Bison is switching to other types of
> >> containers than an underlying array.
> > but should the container still support the $0 notation ?
that did not come out right, should have read
...but surely the new c
On Thu, 26 Oct 2006, Akim Demaille wrote:
> >>> "Hans" == Hans Aberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> [Just passing by, no time for more :( ]
>
> > It was before I recalling you showing up on the list. Probably Bug-
> > Bison. Perhaps Akim or Paul can inform the truth about $0.
>
> I did sugge
>>> "Hans" == Hans Aberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[Just passing by, no time for more :( ]
> It was before I recalling you showing up on the list. Probably Bug-
> Bison. Perhaps Akim or Paul can inform the truth about $0.
I did suggest it would be nice to be able to name them, and actually
t
On Thu, 26 Oct 2006, Hans Aberg wrote:
> On 26 Oct 2006, at 02:03, Joel E. Denny wrote:
>
> > I don't know the plans for the C++ skeletons. However, the Open Group
> > specifies that $0 and $-n should be supported by Yacc, so this should not
> > go away for the C skeletons at least.
>
> If says
On 26 Oct 2006, at 02:03, Joel E. Denny wrote:
I don't know the plans for the C++ skeletons. However, the Open Group
specifies that $0 and $-n should be supported by Yacc, so this
should not
go away for the C skeletons at least.
If says that $0 should be supported, Bison is likely to suppo
On Wed, 25 Oct 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> using bison version 2.2.
> Message from bison:
> pl1-parser.y:873.17-63: warning: unused value: $3
>
> This warning I find a bit confusing...
When we discussed adding this warning, we agreed that it's usually a
mistake if th
On Wed, 25 Oct 2006, Hans Aberg wrote:
> > > be guaranteed, in view of that Bison is switching to other types of
> > > containers than an underlying array.
> > but should the container still support the $0 notation ?
>
> My memory is hazy, so you will have to wait for the developers with the full
On 25 Oct 2006, at 23:26, Joel E. Denny wrote:
On Wed, 25 Oct 2006, Hans Aberg wrote:
I think you should take away the use of $0, because it may no
longer be
guaranteed, in view of that Bison is switching to other types of
containers
than an underlying array. Then you mid-rule action become
On 25 Oct 2006, at 22:13, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wednesday 25 October 2006 21:22, Hans Aberg wrote:
On 25 Oct 2006, at 17:05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My grammar set a number of attributes in an allocated structure
using $0 to
reference the structure on the stack. The full rules are as fo
On Wed, 25 Oct 2006, Hans Aberg wrote:
> I think you should take away the use of $0, because it may no longer be
> guaranteed, in view of that Bison is switching to other types of containers
> than an underlying array. Then you mid-rule action becomes unnecessary.
I must have forgotten that discu
On Wednesday 25 October 2006 21:22, Hans Aberg wrote:
> On 25 Oct 2006, at 17:05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > My grammar set a number of attributes in an allocated structure
> > using $0 to
> > reference the structure on the stack. The full rules are as follow
> > procoption:
> > MAIN { if
On 25 Oct 2006, at 17:05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Bison list,
using bison version 2.2.
Message from bison:
pl1-parser.y:873.17-63: warning: unused value: $3
This warning I find a bit confusing...
Line 873 contains: |procoptionlist ',' {$$=$1;} procoption {$$=$1;}
$3 ref
Hi Bison list,
using bison version 2.2.
Message from bison:
pl1-parser.y:873.17-63: warning: unused value: $3
This warning I find a bit confusing...
Line 873 contains: |procoptionlist ',' {$$=$1;} procoption {$$=$1;}
$3 refers to the embedded action after the comma.
My gra
31 matches
Mail list logo
