|
From: | Paolo Bonzini |
Subject: | Re: FYI: Missing \n |
Date: | Sun, 21 Jan 2007 12:27:45 +0100 |
User-agent: | Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (Macintosh/20061207) |
(maybe sym(@bam) or something?)
No, please, because...
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); }
... I like these so much more (except that I'd use %unused instead of %use, also in Akim's proposal).
Maybe, in the latter case: sym(foo): sym(bar) sym(%unused) sym(baz) sym(foo): sym(bar) sym(bam %unused) sym(baz) Paolo
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |