[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH]: Suggested documentation about working with Bison versions.
From: |
Paul Eggert |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH]: Suggested documentation about working with Bison versions. |
Date: |
Wed, 14 Oct 2020 11:38:14 -0700 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 |
On 10/13/20 5:11 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
doc: document best deployment practices.
Thanks, this sort of thing should be helpful. I see you haven't signed copyright
papers for Bison, though. I assume you know how to jump through the hoops? If
not, I can send you email as to how to get the ball rolling.
+Bison provides a Yacc compatibility mode in which it strives to conform with
+the POSIX standard. Grammar files which are written to the POSIX standard, and
+do not take advantage of any of the special capabilities of Bison, are very
+likely to work with many version of Bison without modification.
very likely to work with many version of->
should work with
Also, the Texinfo input should have two spaces after ".", if that's the style
used elsewhere in the Bison manual.
+Some features of Bison have been, or are being adopted into other Yacc-like
+programs. Therefore it might seem that is a good idea to write grammar code
+which targets multiple implementations, similarly to the way C programs are
+often written to target multiple compilers and language versions. This practice
+is not highly recommended, however.
Remove "This practice is not highly recommended, however." It conveys little
info and isn't needed in the context of the paragraph.
+Developers who strive to make their Bison code simultaneously
+compatible with other parser generators are encouraged to nevertheless use
+specific versions of all generators, and still follow the recommended practice
+of shipping generated output.
Not sure what is being recommended here. A developer is supposed to list all
versions of all generates the grammar is capable with, and test them all, but
generate a tarball with one of them? Or generate multiple tarballs?
Perhaps supply a small example of the issue. That would clarify the intent, I
expect.