On Thu, 18 Jan 2007, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > No Unix utility behaves like this with respect to data files (even > though your comparison with how shells look in the PATH is right).
info --file=FILE > IMHO, the right way to do it would be: If the file name does not contain > a `/', and is not found in the current directory, it's one of Bison's > installed files. This is the same as include paths in C, and it fits > better than the comparison with shells looking up the commands. Hans Aberg, Paul Eggert, and I already discussed this possibility. To summarize, I prefer the current logic because it's very simple and backward-compatible. The C include path is a different animal with more complex needs. > This is > partially backwards-incompatible, in case someone has a lalr1.cc file in > their current directory, but people should switch to %language anyway. That seems dangerous to me. > Also, you're not modifying -S if I understand correctly. -S and --skeleton should work right. See the test cases.
