Re: [updated PATCH] %language declaration

[Paolo Bonzini]

Joel E. Denny wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Dec 2006, Paul Eggert wrote:
>
> > Seriously, though, this business about "experimental" is kind of
> > demoralizing for users who are reading the manual.  Why should they
> > invest their work in an "experimental" feature?
>
> The C++ skeletons and %destructor seemed to do okay this way, but I don't 
> know the full history there.

Yes, but I also think that we should not exaggerate.

Personally, I would not label as experimental even the requires/provides 
part (though I do find it a bit unnerving that we need %code-top...), as 
well as %language.

If it wasn't for the language conventions, I would have kept the ".tab" 
even in the Java output, as I don't like to depart too much from the 
traditional Bison behavior.

Paolo