Re: proposal: simplify prologue alternatives into %code

[Paolo Bonzini]

> > Not a big case of interface mismatch.
>
> If you think that, you are of course free to fix it your own way.
>
> You idea is to let the C++ polymorphic class implementation to emulate 
> the implementation of a C 'union', and such ties between unrelated 
> features in different languages does not seem wise to me.

Absolutely not.  I would be in favor of allowing to specify a type 
within %type<> (using static_cast instead of accessing a union).

What I meant, is that requiring the yystype to implement operator*() is 
not likely to put a lot of burden on somebody who has to resolve the 
interface mismatch.

Paolo