Re: push parser implemenation

[Joel E. Denny]

On Mon, 24 Apr 2006, Akim Demaille wrote:

> So as far as I'm concerned, I'm ready to switch to a new skeleton.
> Now let's focus on making the code nicer to read.  But what do the
> other members of the team (the Pauls and Joel) think?

Based on what you wrote below, I think you're suggesting temporarily 
adding a separate undistributed "push.c" for development purposes.  After 
2.2 is released and we're sure "push.c" is in good shape, we'd rename it 
"yacc.c" and document it.  Am I following?  If so, this seems fine to me.

>  > I've attached push_opt.c, and the new bench.pl script I'm using. You can
>  > diff it to yours to see the difference.
> 
> I have checked in the bench script in etc/, that will ease the
> tracking of changes.  I have added other changes on top of yours.
> I did not checkin the push parsers because I don't remember whether we
> have all the copyright issues settled.  If we do, then how about
> checking in your skeleton so that we can also easily track the
> differences?  As long as the tarball is not touched, I see no problem
> with adding files even before the 2.2 release.

Once you have the push skeleton checked in, I'll find it easier to help 
out.  If I get really turned on to this, I might take on adding push mode 
to "glr.c".  Already, I like Akim's idea of using this feature to 
facilitate multiple entry points: yyparse_push() to specify the desired 
entry point followed by a yyparse() to parse the rest of the input from 
yylex().

Joel