bison-patches
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: push parser


From: Bob Rossi
Subject: Re: push parser
Date: Mon, 25 Dec 2006 14:56:21 -0500
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.12-2006-07-14

On Mon, Dec 25, 2006 at 01:22:19PM -0500, Joel E. Denny wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Dec 2006, Joel E. Denny wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, 20 Dec 2006, Joel E. Denny wrote:
> > 
> > >  2006-12-20  Joel E. Denny  <address@hidden>
> > >  
> > > + Enable push parsers to operate in impure mode.  Thus, %push-parser no
> > > + longer implies %pure-parser.  The point of this change is to move
> > > + towards being able to test the push parser code by running the entire
> > > + test suite as if %push-parser had been declared.
> > 
> > Another advantage of this patch is that it eliminates any debate over how 
> > a %pure-parser should be handled when there's a %push-parser.  That is, 
> > %pure-parser now has an obvious meaning.
> 
> I committed the above and the following.  Some of these changes may need 
> to be reconsidered (especially the yyparse implementation in push mode), 
> but we can revise later if necessary.  For now, we are at least able to 
> run the test suite in push mode using the procedure I described earlier in 
> this thread:
> 
> a. cp push.c yacc.c
> 
> b. In yacc.c, look for this line:
> 
>   m4_include(b4_pkgdatadir/[c.m4])
> 
> Add this line afterwards:
> 
>   m4_define([b4_push_if], [$1])
> 
> c. Now look for this line in yacc.c:
> 
>    YYDPRINTF ((stderr, "Return for a new token:\n"));
> 
> Delete it.
> 
> d. Run make maintainer-check.
> 
> I'm thinking it might be useful to automate this at some point.
> 
> I'll follow soon with a patch that addresses performance.

Great! Thanks for your hard work! Let me know if there is something I
could do.

Merry Christmas,
Bob Rossi




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]