|
From: | Hans Aberg |
Subject: | Re: %name-prefix overrides --name-prefix? |
Date: | Tue, 12 Dec 2006 23:03:06 +0100 |
On 12 Dec 2006, at 22:37, Joel E. Denny wrote:
Then again, it occurs to me now that anyone who writes: bison --defines="parser-new.h" parser.y is surely aware that some file somewhere very likely depends on theoriginal header name. A possible problem is someone who doesn't realize that a header was previously being generated at all, but I guess we have to assume the user knows something about what's going on. If we go thisway, there should probably be a short note about this issue in the --defines and %defines documentation.Thoughsome may want to override it. Perhaps yet another macro, that can be undefinedat need!?I hope that's not necessary.
It is probably not difficult to that later, would somebody be in dire need of it. :-)
The situation I am thinking of, is if one want to change a project somebody else has written. Then it is pain having to patch up every new version. Sothis favors 'make'.Yes, I was thinking of that too.
I have done such patching of Hugs, porting to Mac OS 9, over a number of years, so I have some idea of it. It is fine for some time, but after awhile, it is a chore.
I'm now leaning towards make's approach. I have some patches to review and some other work, so I'll sit on this a little longer in case othershave input.
Though I do not have any direct need for in the case of Bison. So it is not a big hurry to me. :-)
But it is good to set a development rule. Hans Aberg
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |