[continuing a discussion from "Re: warn about conflicting skeleton-generated files"]
On Wed, 13 Dec 2006, Hans Aberg wrote: > One may just go in, > changing the skeleton file at one of the places, and if there is something > already written, all will look normal. So perhaps, in the case of the > precedence rule, one should give a warning if both methods are used. It's clear to me that %foo overriding --foo is misleading to the user invoking Bison from the command line. I think you're now saying the reverse could also be misleading. I agree. Imagine the user who edits the grammar file and then types make. He may not realize that the makefile invokes Bison with --foo overriding the %foo he just wrote. Maybe we're trying to be too helpful, but I'm not sure. Here's another proposal. Bison would complain about any conflict between --foo and %foo. However, it would let --force-foo override %foo. I believe there are only a handful of options for which this should actually be done: --defines --output --name-prefix --file-prefix --skeleton By the way, should there even be a --language? Isn't the target language always so tightly coupled with the grammar file that %language should always be used instead? Why would anyone ever want to override it? Paolo, what do you think?
