Bison development

[Hans Aberg]

If one assumes that Bison in the future will support both different
algorithms and different output languages, then perhaps one should have two
options
  %algorithm <algorithm-name>
  %language <language-name>
The default name for the skeleton file might be say
  <language-name>.<algorithm-name>.bison
For example, the C++ file for LALR might be named C++.LALR.bison,
C++.lalr.bison, or something.

If one should get around this problem of having to write a separate
skeleton file for each (algorithm, language) pair, then one might design an
intermediate skeleton language that can understand the output algorithms.
The output would, for each algorithm, be written in this intermediate
language. Then an additional translator to a favorite output language would
be hooked onto after this output, translating to ones favorite output
language, C, C++, etc.

The point is that the algorithm itself only requires a very small language,
so this could be done. The problem though is that say C differs from C++ in
for example where initializers can be put.

Therefore, one may still need to have different skeleton files for
different languages, but it might still simplify the problem.

  Hans Aberg