On Dec 18, 2012, at 8:40 PM, Eli Friedman <[email protected]> wrote:

>>> Oh, I see... so the idea is to hack up getCharAndSize instead of
>>> calling isUCNAfterSlash/ConsumeUCNAfterSlash where we expect a UCN,
>>> use a marker which essentially means "saw a UCN".
>>> 
>>> Seems like a workable approach; I don't think it actually helps any
>>> with error recovery (I'm pretty sure we can't diagnose anything
>>> without knowing what kind of token we're forming), but I think it will
>>> make the patch simpler.  I'll try to hack up a new version of my
>>> patch.
>> 
>> Attached.
> 
> And, I've discovered a rather large weakness of this approach:
> actually writing a correct implementation of getCharAndSizeSlow which
> returns a special value for UCNs is painful at best.  I might have to
> abandon this route.

How terrible would it be to make getChar* return a uint32_t codepoint?  Would 
that fix the problem?

-Chris
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to