On Friday 27 October 2006 00:12, you wrote: > On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > in semantic actions at any level in the parse tree. Bison would have > > > to check every possible expansion of every possible RHS symbol. That > > > implementation seems like more work than I want to do. > > > > ... but how hard would it be to check just one level ? > > Not as hard surely, but not trivial. If warning about just the current > rule is misleading, arbitrarily choosing to go only one level down seems > just as confusing or more confusing in general. true, good point, ... but this is what you can realistically check, > Then again, I try to > avoid mid-rules, $0, and $-n, so maybe I don't have the right feel for > this. maybe disable the check completely if $0 or $-n is used.
What is the impact of the unused $n ? > I think we need input from other users to get a better feel for > what's common. I doubt there will be many uses of $0 beyond one level. And also since bison are LALR(1) the restriction of checking by looking just one level ahead is not that far off. Henrik _______________________________________________ [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-bison
