Title: E-mail message content
Bonjour,
Il semble que vous ne fassiez pas encore partie de notre club.
Voudriez vous en faire partie ? L'inscription est gratuite et vous pouvez en retirer des avantages financiers importants.
pour visiter notre site : Clicquez ici
avec nos remerciements pour
At 17:50 +0100 2005/03/26, Laurence Finston wrote:
> 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
%token YYID
%%
expression : hier_id
| method_call
/* unary and secondary expression follows.
*/
;
method_call : expression '.' YYID '(' expression ')'
;
hier_id : YYID
| hier_id '.' YYID
;
How to resolve the shift/reduce conflict? Please help.
-So
Dear All,
I noticed that there is an interest in having an example of using bison++
and flex++. I also noticed that there is no concrete example in the web
(from my search). For this reason, this an example of how to use bison++
and flex++.
I am using bison++ Version 1.21-8 and flex++ versio
can you tell a bit more about what your grammar tries to achieve ?
from your very brief description, it sounds like you can do this:
1+3.YYID(7)
but what would this mean ?
Henrik
On Sunday 27 March 2005 21.37, Soumitra Kumar wrote:
> %token YYID
> %%
> expression : hier_id
>
> | me
1+3.YYID(7) has no meaning. But following is a valid
expression:
(YYID + YYID).YYID().YYID () + YYID() + YYID.YYID() +
YYID.YYID
-Soumitra.
--- Henrik Sorensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> can you tell a bit more about what your grammar
> tries to achieve ?
> from your very brief description, it
