> You cannot use Bison to resolve dynamically your precedence if > you have a free set of levels. But if you have a fixed number > of level, say 10, [...]
Fixed number seems perfectly enough to me. > you could define ten tokens for each level, > map each operator to the corresponding level, storing the actual > operator as a semantic value. The scanner could use a map for > instance to decide to which token you map each operator. > > That wouldn't be of much help if you also want to play with > associativity. Maybe using even more tokens to denote the different > possibilities. I didn't understand all of this at first, but after reading the Hans example too, I think I understand every part of this now. Thank you! I'm not going to exploit this right now, but I rest assured to know a way to explore if I ever need to get there. _______________________________________________ help-bison@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-bison
