Bob Rossi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> - Does it make sense to use these options together? (I don't know what
> %parse-param is used for)
I suspect it does. %parse-param is used to specify extra options
given to yyparse and friends. I'd expect a push parser would
always want to use %parse-param, no? So you can make it an error
if someone tries to define a push parser without parameters.
And then, given:
%parse-param {semantic_value *result}
%parse-param {int *count}
you can generate:
void yyparse (semantic_value *result, int *count);
(perhaps with extra args? I don't know what a push parser needs) instead of:
void yyparse (void *PVVOID);
> - Should I generate a yypushparse function instead to avoid this
> problem?
This would make sense, if you plan to be able to generate both
functions in the same module. Is that a reasonable thing to do?
> - Should I make the push-parser handle those extra parameters when
> %parse-param is used? (ie)
> void yyparse (void *PVVOID, semantic_value *result, int *count);
Yes, I think that'll be helpful.
