Re: I need simpler examples (was: RE: Enhancement request: enabling Variant in C parsers)

[Uxio Prego]

Hi, judging these docs and multiple changelog entries mentioning
`%define api.pure` as a replacement for `%pure-parser`, and the
latter being turned to wrapper on the former at some point, etc.;

I would expect that tests/input.at recommend, for `%pure_parser`,
`%define api.pure` optionally `%define api.pure full`, instead of
`%pure-parser`? Around line 2372, that’s the test side. I don't
know where is the non-test code side of that, and I don't feel that
much momentum to find out and propose a patch.

Cheers,

> On 8 Dec 2018, at 07:19, Akim Demaille <address@hidden> wrote:
> 
> Hi!
> 
>> Le 7 déc. 2018 à 20:30, Uxio Prego <address@hidden> a écrit :
>> 
>> I don't know of this division of parsers in pure and impure.
>> 
>> Are pure approaches like GLR while LALR(k) are impure?
> 
> No, it's unrelated to the parsing technology, it's only a question
> of API: whether you exchange information with the scanner via global
> variables, or additional arguments.
> 
> https://www.gnu.org/software/bison/manual/html_node/Pure-Decl.html