Re: tetex-20011202 and bison-1.30g don't get along
On Sat, Dec 22, 2001 at 03:47:09PM +0100, Akim Demaille wrote:
> Thanks for the report. I believe the bug is (actually, are, there
> were two) fixed. Could you give a try to
>
> http://www.lrde.epita.fr/~akim/download/bison-1.30i.tar.gz
> http://www.lrde.epita.fr/~akim/download/bison-1.30i.tar.bz2
This version appears to work.
mrc
--
Mike Castle [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.netcom.com/~dalgoda/
We are all of us living in the shadow of Manhattan. -- Watchmen
fatal ("You are in a maze of twisty compiler features, all different"); -- gcc
Re: tetex-20011202 and bison-1.30g don't get along
> "Mike" == Mike Castle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Mike> 1.30h fails with same error. Thanks for the report. I believe the bug is (actually, are, there were two) fixed. Could you give a try to http://www.lrde.epita.fr/~akim/download/bison-1.30i.tar.gz http://www.lrde.epita.fr/~akim/download/bison-1.30i.tar.bz2 ? TIA!
Re: tetex-20011202 and bison-1.30g don't get along
> "Mike" == Mike Castle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Mike> Whoops. Deleted Akim's reply, so replying to myself to at least Mike> keep it in the same thread. Mike> On Mon, Dec 17, 2001 at 04:08:14PM -0800, Mike Castle wrote: >> No obvious problems with bison-1.30e. This is the first >> compilation error I've encountered with bison-1.30g. Mike> 1.30h fails with same error. Mike> I generated a diff of the 1.30[eh] output, but even gzipped, Mike> it's 12k. More than I feel comfortable sending via email. I'll Mike> put it up on the web in a bit. Hopefully I'll remember to write Mike> the URL before I send this email. (If the list owners want it Mike> archived, they may to send it out anyway.) Thanks, there is indeed a genuine problem somewhere. The diffs are big, but most of the diffs are irrelevant. What is not is: | @@ -471,7 +473,7 @@ |94, 0, 113, 0, 158, 0, 152, 154,94,94, | 0, 245, 246, 241, 244, 243, 0, 0, 237, 300, | 0, 271, 0, 291, 200, 0, 194, 198, 248, 260, | - 139, 178, 180, 0, 0, 262, 125,94, 0, 124, | + 139, 178, 180, 0, 0, 0, 125,94, 0, 124, | 112, 115, 121, 122, 0, 119, 154, 156, 151, 157, | 0, 173, 165, 169, 176, 0, 0, 276, 217, 219, | 223, 225, 227, 229, 209, 211, 233, 213, 235, 215, in the parser, and | @@ -1708,7 +1713,6 @@ | CONST_DEC_PART -> const_tok CONST_DEC_LIST . (rule 33) | CONST_DEC_LIST -> CONST_DEC_LIST . CONST_DEC (rule 35) | | -undef_id_tok reduce using rule 36 (@7) | $default reduce using rule 33 (CONST_DEC_PART) | CONST_DEC go to state 68 | @7 go to state 57 | @@ -1852,7 +1856,6 @@ | TYPE_DEC_PART -> type_tok TYPE_DEF_LIST . (rule 82) | TYPE_DEF_LIST -> TYPE_DEF_LIST . TYPE_DEF (rule 84) | | -undef_id_tok reduce using rule 85 (@26) | $default reduce using rule 82 (TYPE_DEC_PART) | TYPE_DEF go to state 78 | @26go to state 72 | @@ -1944,9 +1947,6 @@ | VAR_DEC_PART -> var_tok VAR_DEC_LIST . (rule 126) | VAR_DEC_LIST -> VAR_DEC_LIST . VAR_DEC (rule 128) | | -undef_id_tok reduce using rule 129 (@33) | -var_id_tok reduce using rule 129 (@33) | -field_id_tok reduce using rule 129 (@33) | $default reduce using rule 126 (VAR_DEC_PART) | VAR_DECgo to state 86 | @33go to state 82 | @@ -3137,8 +3137,6 @@ | VARIABLE -> var_id_tok . @51 VAR_DESIG_LIST (rule 194) | VARIABLE -> var_id_tok . (rule 195) | | -'['reduce using rule 193 (@51) | -'.'reduce using rule 193 (@51) | $default reduce using rule 195 (VARIABLE) | @51go to state 252 etc. in the output. I'll track this down, many thanks!
Re: tetex-20011202 and bison-1.30g don't get along
Whoops. Deleted Akim's reply, so replying to myself to at least keep it in
the same thread.
On Mon, Dec 17, 2001 at 04:08:14PM -0800, Mike Castle wrote:
> No obvious problems with bison-1.30e. This is the first compilation error
> I've encountered with bison-1.30g.
1.30h fails with same error.
I generated a diff of the 1.30[eh] output, but even gzipped, it's 12k.
More than I feel comfortable sending via email. I'll put it up on the web
in a bit. Hopefully I'll remember to write the URL before I send this
email. (If the list owners want it archived, they may to send it out
anyway.)
Out of curiosity, I tried byacc, and it worked fine. :->
http://dalgoda.home.netcom.com/diff.gz
The teTeX source I'm trying to compile is at:
ftp://tug.ctan.org/tex-archive/systems/unix/teTeX-beta/teTeX-src-beta-20011202.tar.gz
Though it's a bit of a heavy-weight package to install.
Maybe we can get Thomas to generate a small example of the grammar and
input?
mrc
--
Mike Castle [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.netcom.com/~dalgoda/
We are all of us living in the shadow of Manhattan. -- Watchmen
fatal ("You are in a maze of twisty compiler features, all different"); -- gcc
Re: tetex-20011202 and bison-1.30g don't get along
> "Mike" == Mike Castle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Mike> I'm not sure where there error occurs, so I'm sending to both Mike> lists. I'm not sure on subscription policies, so may need to Mike> replies as necessary. Mike> Joys of building every piece of cutting edge material I can lay Mike> my hands on. :-> :) Mike> Oh, I guess I should first ask, can anyone else reproduce this, Mike> or specific to my system? No idea... Could you try to diff the output of the two Bisons on the suspicious y file? Thanks! Also, if there are useless rules in the grammar, then I know 1.30g failed. In this case, if there are indeed useless rules in this grammar, please give a try to the forthcoming 1.30h.
