TODO: update.

TODO

@@ -1,31 +1,11 @@
--*- outline -*-
-
 * Short term
-** Use syntax_error from the scanner?
-This would provide a means to raise syntax error from function called
-from the scanner.  Actually, there is no good solution to report a
-lexical error in general.  Usually they are kept at the scanner level
-only, ignoring the guilty token.  But that might not be the best bet,
-since we don't benefit from the syntactic error recovery.
-
-We still have the possibility to return an invalid token number, which
-does the trick.  But then the error message from the parser is poor
-(something like "unexpected $undefined").  Since the scanner probably
-already reported the error, we should directly enter error-recovery,
-without reporting the error message (i.e., YYERROR's semantics).
-
-Back to lalr1.cc (whose name is now quite unfortunate, since it also
-covers lr and ielr), if we support exceptions from yylex, should we
-propose a lexical_error in addition to syntax_error?  Should they have
-a common root, say parse_error?  Should syntax_error be renamed
-syntactic_error for consistency with lexical_error?
-
 ** Variable names.
 What should we name `variant' and `lex_symbol'?
 
 ** Use b4_symbol in all the skeleton
-Then remove the older system, including the tables generated by
-output.c
+Move its definition in the more standard places and deploy it in other
+skeletons.  Then remove the older system, including the tables
+generated by output.c
 
 ** Update the documentation on gnu.org
 
@@ -58,11 +38,11 @@ as lr0.cc, why upper case?
 ** bench several bisons.
 Enhance bench.pl with %b to run different bisons.
 
-** Use b4_symbol everywhere.
-Move its definition in the more standard places and deploy it in other
-skeletons.
-
 * Various
+** Warnings
+Warnings about type tags that are used in printer and dtors, but not
+for symbols?
+
 ** YYPRINT
 glr.c inherits its symbol_print function from c.m4, which supports
 YYPRINT.  But to use YYPRINT yytoknum is needed, which not defined by
@@ -154,7 +134,7 @@ some parts.
 
 * Header guards
 
-From Franc,ois: should we keep the directory part in the CPP guard?
+From François: should we keep the directory part in the CPP guard?
 
 
 * Yacc.c: CPP Macros
@@ -164,8 +144,6 @@ They should not: it is not documented.  But if they need to, let's
 find something clean (not like YYLSP_NEEDED...).
 
 
-* Installation
-
 * Documentation
 Before releasing, make sure the documentation ("Understanding your
 parser") refers to the current `output' format.
@@ -403,6 +381,12 @@ Here's a proposal for how a new implementation might look:
 
   http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bison-patches/2009-09/msg00086.html
 
+
+Local Variables:
+mode: outline
+coding: utf-8
+End:
+
 -----
 
 Copyright (C) 2001-2004, 2006, 2008-2012 Free Software Foundation, Inc.