On 5 Jul 2007, at 16:26, Gary Funck wrote:
Hans, thanks for the follow-up. I noticed after the
fact that I didn't modify my current %union definition
to the form where it held the storage for the binary
data within the node itself. To clarify, the defintion
should have been:
%union {
uda_tword_t val;
uda_tword_t val2[2];
uda_tint_t signed_val;
uda_taddr_t addr_val;
uda_debugger_pts_t pts;
char *str;
uda_binary_data_t data;
}
where uda_binary_data_t is defined as:
One idea of using %union is to save space, so it would no longer
apply with your definition, as the "union" takes up at least the size
of its smallest member.
Hans Aberg
_______________________________________________
[email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-bison
