Hi Laurence, > Oh, I see. I thought you were writing a C-like interpreter that > would actually execute the loop. In that case, you're right, and my > point is irrelevant. I suppose what ultimately gets output is > machine-code or assembler with a branch and a goto for the loop?
Yes! you're right. For the stack overflow, it's true that it's a kind of issue. It's a bit complicated for my case, since I'm not using bison's semantic stack to push and pop the terminals and to link them together in a tree form. I'm using one of my own right now and I'm really feeling like I'm duplicating that functionality so may be I'm going to rewrite the actions to use bison in the standard way (i.e, actions use $$, $1, $2, etc.). But I also believe that it's also a limitation in bison too (its stack size is fixed). Best regards, Ilyes Gouta. _______________________________________________ help-bison@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-bison
