[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: FYI: Missing \n
From: |
Joel E. Denny |
Subject: |
Re: FYI: Missing \n |
Date: |
Fri, 19 Jan 2007 12:46:14 -0500 (EST) |
On Fri, 19 Jan 2007, Akim Demaille wrote:
> I was thinking about something like
>
> %use token1 token2
>
> etc.
>
> We do need a flag for the warning, but it is not enough: one would
> like to have the warning, and declare symbols used externally.
Yes, I still agree with that.
Now, we also wanted a way to "use" semantic values. You had proposed
something like:
%destructor { free ($$); } sym
sym(foo): sym(bar) sym() sym(baz) { $foo = sym_new ($bar, $baz); }
That is, the 2nd RHS sym has no semantic value, so no unused warning
should be issued.
While I liked this, I struggled to get others on this list to see it, so
maybe it's not intuitive enough. Besides, it is a little cumbersome when
you want to name the location (maybe sym(@bam) or something?) but still
declare the value unused.
Perhaps we should reuse the %use notation rather than combine unused value
declarations with the value name notation:
%destructor { free ($$); } sym
sym: sym sym sym %use $2 { $$ = sym_new ($1, $3); }
With named values:
%destructor { free ($$); } sym
sym(foo): sym(bar) sym(bam) sym(baz) %use $bam {
$foo = sym_new ($bar, $baz);
}
Just an idea....
- Re: FYI: Missing \n, (continued)
- Re: FYI: Missing \n, Joel E. Denny, 2007/01/17
- Re: FYI: Missing \n, Joel E. Denny, 2007/01/17
- Re: FYI: Missing \n, Joel E. Denny, 2007/01/17
- Re: FYI: Missing \n, Akim Demaille, 2007/01/17
- Re: FYI: Missing \n, Akim Demaille, 2007/01/17
- Re: FYI: Missing \n, Joel E. Denny, 2007/01/17
- Re: FYI: Missing \n, Akim Demaille, 2007/01/17
- Re: FYI: Missing \n, Akim Demaille, 2007/01/17
- Re: FYI: Missing \n, Joel E. Denny, 2007/01/17
- Re: FYI: Missing \n, Akim Demaille, 2007/01/19
- Re: FYI: Missing \n,
Joel E. Denny <=
- Re: FYI: Missing \n, Paolo Bonzini, 2007/01/21