At 14:56 +0100 2005/03/25, Laurence Finston wrote:
> This discussion is very confusing, because it mixes two topics:
Extending C++, and what is appropriate for Bison.
This is just my opinion, but I don't think adding type information to
`union'
would be in the spirit of C. If this feature were
> With unions, one wants to avoid dynamic allocations. Each dynamic
> allocation takes several tens, sometimes, hundreds of cycles.
If pointers are used, then memory needs to be allocated for the objects they
point to, whether the pointers are in a `struct' or a `union'. It needn't be
allocated
