On Fri, Sep 29, 2006 at 05:55:08PM -0700, Paul Eggert wrote: > Bob Rossi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > If we force the user to define that function, it add's an unnecessary > > complication to the push parser. That is, the user is mostly likely > > going to call yypushparse, and not care about yyparse at all. However, > > yyparse is the function causing the user to define the yypushlex > > function. What do you think I should do to resolve this? > > Ah, sorry, I didn't understand this issue at all. > > It sounds to me like the push parser shouldn't define yyparse. That > way, the user shouldn't have to care about any lexer function.
I agree. Akim, you were the main advocate for adding this functionality. Can you see any other solution to the problem besides remove yyparse from the generated output? Thanks, Bob Rossi
