Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Gregory Stark wrote:
flex 2.5.33

Aha! Known to be broken, iirc. Use flex 2.5.4a

No, the known breakages with flex were years ago; 2.5.33 has only been
out a year.  I think 2.5.31 might have been the one we saw big problems
with (there's a note warning against using it on the flex sourceforge

I think most of us do still use 2.5.4a, but it'd probably be a good idea
to check out 2.5.33 and see if it can be made to not generate warnings.
I'm certainly tired of seeing the warnings 2.5.4a creates ...

It gives me the same warnings that Greg reported.

I guess we could conditionally add prototypes for those functions to all the .l files if you really want to move to 2.5.33. Kinda yucky, though.



---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

Reply via email to