Hi Christian, > Le 13 déc. 2019 à 19:26, Christian Schoenebeck <schoeneb...@crudebyte.com> a > écrit : > > On Freitag, 13. Dezember 2019 18:15:55 CET Akim Demaille wrote: >> The purpose of string literals has been clarified. Indeed, they are used >> for two different purposes: freeing from having to implement the keyword >> matching in the scanner, and improving error messages. Most of the time >> both can be achieved at the same time, but on occasions, it does not work so >> well. We promote their use for error messages. We still support the >> former case (at least for historical skeletons), but it is _not_ a >> recommended practice. The documentation now warns against this use. A new >> warning, -Wdangling-alias, should help users who want to enforce the use of >> aliases only for error messages. > > That's limited to string literals (e.g. "foo"), it does not apply to > character > literals (e.g. 'f''o''o') as well, does it?
No, I really mean string literals. > Because character literal > sequences are indeed commonly used to handle scanner tasks on parser side and > I haven't seen issues with the latter in years. I've never seen it used :) I think it's a weird idea, but it incurs no technical constraints onto Bison, so I don't have any problem with it. Cheers!
