Re: glr.c YYFPUTC and YYFPUTS macros

[Paul Eggert]

address@hidden writes:

> and if dlopen()/dlsym() is used on a module
> with a GLR parser? then the added putc/puts
> would break existing programs?

Are you worried about programs that redefine the printf function, but
do not redefine putc/puts?  Do you know of programs that do that?  I
would think that would be quite rare.  The C Standard prohibits a
program from defining any external function named printf, and many
implementations enforce that prohibition.

> would prefer only printf's in the generated parsers.

This seems to be a style issue more than anything else, but if there's
enough opposition to the change I suppose we can go back to using printf.