On Thu, 24 Mar 2005, Hans Aberg wrote:
> It would not be the old union, but a new union with new required
> semantics, that is clear.
My point was that `union' is an element of the C and C++ languages,
whereas your new `Union' class would not be. I think this is important,
others may not.
> >Th
Hi All,
I am trying to redirect the standard input of flex to a character
pointer, I do not want to read a file for my input but want to
tokenize and parse a character string I have.
Also I can not want to store the character string in a file and then
read it from there.
So please can anyone tell
At 19:34 +0100 2005/03/23, Laurence Finston wrote:
> One would need to
be aware that the C++ unions
The rest of this sentence was missing.
If one adds such semantics to the C++ union, one needs to be aware of
that it differs from that of the C union. I think this should be
without problem, as o
At 11:10 +0100 2005/03/24, Laurence Finston wrote:
> It would not be the old union, but a new union with new required
semantics, that is clear.
My point was that `union' is an element of the C and C++ languages,
whereas your new `Union' class would not be. I think this is important,
others may n
At 16:06 +0530 2005/03/24, Atul Kulkarni wrote:
I am putting the problem of Flex in this list due to lack of knowledge
about Flex's mailing list and they are because normaly used in tandem
with each other!
Try:
Help-flex mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-flex
