* src/print.c (state_default_rule_compute): New, extracted from...

(print_reductions): here.
Pessimize, but clarify the code.
* tests/conflicts.at (Defaulted Conflicted Reduction): New.
This commit is contained in:
Akim Demaille
2002-06-30 17:32:47 +00:00
parent 53d4308dbb
commit bc933ef16d
4 changed files with 301 additions and 126 deletions

24
TODO
View File

@@ -3,6 +3,16 @@
* URGENT: Documenting C++ output
Write a first documentation for C++ output.
* Report and GLR
How would Paul like to display the conflicted actions? In particular,
what when two reductions are possible on a given lookahead, but one is
part of $default. Should we make the two reductions explicit, or just
keep $default? See the following point.
* Report and Disabled Reductions
See `tests/conflicts.at (Defaulted Conflicted Reduction)', and decide
what we want to do.
* value_components_used
Was defined but not used: where was it coming from? It can't be to
check if %union is used, since the user is free to $<foo>n on her
@@ -16,7 +26,9 @@ to #define yyerror and yyprint to steal internal variables...
* documentation
Explain $axiom (and maybe change its name: BTYacc names it `goal',
byacc `$accept' probably based on AT&T Yacc, Meta `Start'...).
Complete the glossary (item, axiom, ?).
Complete the glossary (item, axiom, ?). Should we also rename `$'?
BYacc uses `$end'. `$eof' is attracting, but after all we may be
parsing a string, a stream etc.
* Error messages
Some are really funky. For instance
@@ -26,11 +38,11 @@ Some are really funky. For instance
is really weird. Revisit them all.
* Report documentation
Extend with error. The hard part will probably be finding the right
rule so that a single state does not exhibit to many yet undocumented
``features''. Maybe an empty action ought to be presented too. Shall
we try to make a single grammar with all these features, or should we
have several very small grammars?
Extend with error productions. The hard part will probably be finding
the right rule so that a single state does not exhibit too many yet
undocumented ``features''. Maybe an empty action ought to be
presented too. Shall we try to make a single grammar with all these
features, or should we have several very small grammars?
* Documentation
Some history of Bison and some bibliography would be most welcome.