|
From: | Paolo Bonzini |
Subject: | Re: [updated PATCH] %language declaration |
Date: | Fri, 15 Dec 2006 09:46:18 +0100 |
User-agent: | Thunderbird 1.5.0.8 (Macintosh/20061025) |
Joel E. Denny wrote:
On Thu, 14 Dec 2006, Paul Eggert wrote:Seriously, though, this business about "experimental" is kind of demoralizing for users who are reading the manual. Why should they invest their work in an "experimental" feature?The C++ skeletons and %destructor seemed to do okay this way, but I don't know the full history there.
Yes, but I also think that we should not exaggerate.Personally, I would not label as experimental even the requires/provides part (though I do find it a bit unnerving that we need %code-top...), as well as %language.
If it wasn't for the language conventions, I would have kept the ".tab" even in the Java output, as I don't like to depart too much from the traditional Bison behavior.
Paolo
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |