Re: *** GMX Spamverdacht *** Re: bison 2.6.2 generates incompatible header file

[Frank Heckenbach]

Akim Demaille wrote:

> Indeed, if you want both to be in the same namespace, %define api.prefix
> should do what you want.
> 
> Note that the C++ output supports "%define namespace", in
> which the generated code is put.

Thanks, seems like we have several viable options here. (Though I'd
have to check what about flex -- I haven't followed it recently, and
of course, both parsers need different scanners.)

> What is your policy on this regard?  When do you allow to rise
> the %require'd version of Bison?  (actually, currently I see
> none in 
> http://csound.git.sourceforge.net/git/gitweb.cgi?p=csound/csound5.git;a=blob;f=Engine/csound_orc.y;h=259a4cbe6fd3873120513678f34b936103d2d43d;hb=HEAD)
> 
> > we won't have to declare
> > yyparse at all which is (slightly) better than always having to
> > declare it as it was before.
> 
> Yes, indeed.
> 
> Can the version of Csound compiled by Debian be changed easily to
> compile cleanly with Bison 2.6?

I'm not part of the Csound team (if you understood that), I was just
replying to the question about an example which we have in our
(unrelated) project.

FWIW, our support policy is basically Debian oldstable, so we'll
probably drop support for Bison < 2.4.1 early next year.

About the C++ skeleton, I'm currently busy with other tasks, but
when I get around to it and encounter any issues, I'll post on
bug-bison (would have anyway :-).

Frank