Thanks a lot Jim. That was very quick. I will check it out and let you know.
Gokul. On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 9:43 PM, Jim Idle <[email protected]> wrote: > The latest templates process the default parameter values correctly, I > fixed that too – I need to fix Hudson so the snapshot gets built, but you > can also get the templates from fisheye and just drop them in. The change is > obvious and affect C.stg and AST.stg. > > > > Jim > > > > > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto: > [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Gokulakannan Somasundaram > *Sent:* Friday, December 11, 2009 1:40 AM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* [antlr-interest] Fwd: Reporting a bug in C Target > > > > Missed the group.... > > Gokul. > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: *Gokulakannan Somasundaram* <[email protected]> > Date: Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 3:08 PM > Subject: Re: [antlr-interest] Reporting a bug in C Target > To: Jim Idle <[email protected]> > > > Sure Jim. I have found my way around Maven and now i am able to build the > tool.jar alone. I will use the current templates from the snapshot. I have > also found that ANTLR is specifically disabling the default parameter values > being assigned to the parameters passed to the rules. This functionality is > present in C++(as you may know). But is there a reason why we are doing > this? > > Thanks, > Gokul. > > On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 10:19 PM, Jim Idle <[email protected]> wrote: > > If you want to try it out then you will be able to download the snapshot > release of the ANTLR tool later today, once I upgrade Hudson so that it > builds it again. The runtime has not changed, just the templates. > > > > Jim > > > > *From:* Gokulakannan Somasundaram [mailto:[email protected]] > *Sent:* Thursday, December 10, 2009 2:36 AM > *To:* Jim Idle > *Cc:* David-Sarah Hopwood; [email protected] > > > *Subject:* Re: [antlr-interest] Reporting a bug in C Target > > > > Jim, > > I read about the initialization rules and i agree with them. Thanks for > fixing it so quickly. > > Gokul. > > On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 10:15 AM, Jim Idle <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, 09 Dec 2009 19:54:51 -0800 > > > "Gokulakannan Somasundaram" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Assigning it to 0, will again cause trouble for C++ folks. > > > > No it won't, because 0 is a valid (indeed, the preferred) way of writing > a null pointer constant in C++. > > > > I think you misunderstood me. I said assigning 0 to a enum in C++ will > throw a compiler error. > > > > I didn't though :). See email about new initialization rules. I think that > they are much mire in keeping with C and C++. More generally it makes the > grammar programmer responsible for behaviour, which is in line with the rest > of the C stuff. > > David's point about C++ is correct though 0 == NULL is guranteed in ANSI C, > evenbthough rhe compiler must work it out. Better to use NULL consistently > and try to avoid adding to the billion dollars. > > Jim > > > Gokul. > > > > > > > > List: http://www.antlr.org/mailman/listinfo/antlr-interest > Unsubscribe: > http://www.antlr.org/mailman/options/antlr-interest/your-email-address > > > > > > > List: http://www.antlr.org/mailman/listinfo/antlr-interest > Unsubscribe: > http://www.antlr.org/mailman/options/antlr-interest/your-email-address > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "il-antlr-interest" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/il-antlr-interest?hl=en.
List: http://www.antlr.org/mailman/listinfo/antlr-interest Unsubscribe: http://www.antlr.org/mailman/options/antlr-interest/your-email-address
