[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: push parser
From: |
Joel E. Denny |
Subject: |
Re: push parser |
Date: |
Wed, 20 Dec 2006 18:30:14 -0500 (EST) |
On Wed, 20 Dec 2006, Joel E. Denny wrote:
> 2006-12-20 Joel E. Denny <address@hidden>
>
> + Enable push parsers to operate in impure mode. Thus, %push-parser no
> + longer implies %pure-parser. The point of this change is to move
> + towards being able to test the push parser code by running the entire
> + test suite as if %push-parser had been declared.
Another advantage of this patch is that it eliminates any debate over how
a %pure-parser should be handled when there's a %push-parser. That is,
%pure-parser now has an obvious meaning.
Paul, is this one ok with you?
- Re: push parser, (continued)
- Re: push parser, Joel E. Denny, 2006/12/19
- Re: push parser, Paul Eggert, 2006/12/19
- Re: push parser, Joel E. Denny, 2006/12/19
- Re: push parser, Paul Eggert, 2006/12/19
- Re: push parser, Joel E. Denny, 2006/12/19
- Re: push parser, Paul Eggert, 2006/12/20
- Re: push parser, Joel E. Denny, 2006/12/20
- Re: push parser, Joel E. Denny, 2006/12/20
- Re: push parser, Joel E. Denny, 2006/12/20
- Re: push parser, Joel E. Denny, 2006/12/20
- Re: push parser,
Joel E. Denny <=
- Re: push parser, Bob Rossi, 2006/12/23
- Re: push parser, Joel E. Denny, 2006/12/26
- Re: push parser, Bob Rossi, 2006/12/26
- Re: push parser, Joel E. Denny, 2006/12/26
- Re: push parser, Bob Rossi, 2006/12/26
- Re: push parser, Joel E. Denny, 2006/12/26
- Re: push parser, Bob Rossi, 2006/12/27
- Re: push parser, Joel E. Denny, 2006/12/27
- Re: push parser, Bob Rossi, 2006/12/27
- Re: push parser, Joel E. Denny, 2006/12/27