[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: RFC: enum instead of #define for tokens
From: |
Akim Demaille |
Subject: |
Re: RFC: enum instead of #define for tokens |
Date: |
08 Apr 2002 10:48:36 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.4 (Common Lisp) |
>>>>> "Hans" == Hans Aberg <address@hidden> writes:
Hans> Well, the Bison generated parser already supports (or makes use
Hans> of) two.
Hans> In fact, settling for Unicode only might simplify the
Hans> cross-compilation problem, as one then can handle it via code
Hans> converters.
such as the scanners.
- Re: RFC: enum instead of #define for tokens, (continued)
- Re: RFC: enum instead of #define for tokens, Hans Aberg, 2002/04/04
- Re: RFC: enum instead of #define for tokens, Paul Eggert, 2002/04/04
- Re: RFC: enum instead of #define for tokens, Akim Demaille, 2002/04/05
- Re: RFC: enum instead of #define for tokens, Paul Eggert, 2002/04/05
- Re: RFC: enum instead of #define for tokens, Akim Demaille, 2002/04/05
- Re: RFC: enum instead of #define for tokens, Hans Aberg, 2002/04/05
- Re: RFC: enum instead of #define for tokens, Paul Eggert, 2002/04/05
- Re: RFC: enum instead of #define for tokens, Hans Aberg, 2002/04/05
- Re: RFC: enum instead of #define for tokens, Akim Demaille, 2002/04/08
- Re: RFC: enum instead of #define for tokens, Hans Aberg, 2002/04/08
- Re: RFC: enum instead of #define for tokens,
Akim Demaille <=
- Re: RFC: enum instead of #define for tokens, Hans Aberg, 2002/04/08
Re: RFC: enum instead of #define for tokens, Hans Aberg, 2002/04/02