Bob Rossi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> What should I do with yynerrs?
I'd leave it out. It's not documented (and not that useful), so no harm done. > Still wondering what to do with yynerrs. I simply made it a local > variable for now, and do not have the user pass it in. But the local variable will contain nonsense in a push parser, right? If so, better to omit it for push parsers, so that if a user action refers to yynerrs we'll get a compile-time error rather than run-time garbage. > One issue I had is, now the yyparse function (which calls yypushparse) > depends on yylex to take 2 parameters. This breaks the small test I have > that is not in the test suite because my yylex takes nothing. Should we > force the user to have yylex take these parameters? or should we somehow > modify yyparse ()? How about if we call the push-parser lexer "yypushlex" rather than "yylex"? That would be consistent with renaming yyparse to yypushparse. I didn't see any other problems with your patch.
