On Thu, 2003-01-30 at 21:30, Kevin Brown wrote:
>
> That said, if the parser's gram.y file is anything to go by, the fixes
> to make it work with bison 1.75 are trivial, so if you change your
> mind I'll be happy to do the work.
>
If your gung ho about doing the work, I see no reason not to do i
Tom Lane wrote:
> Kevin Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> I think it's best to leave well enough alone. The tarball ships with
> >> working bison output files anyway, so all of this really only matters
> >> to people trying to build 7.2.* from a CVS pull.
>
> > Okay, fair enough, but if we i
Kevin Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I think it's best to leave well enough alone. The tarball ships with
>> working bison output files anyway, so all of this really only matters
>> to people trying to build 7.2.* from a CVS pull.
> Okay, fair enough, but if we intend to continue to maintai
Tom Lane wrote:
> Kevin Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I'm attaching a patch for 7.2.4's parser/gram.y that fixes all of
> > bison 1.75's complaints.
>
> But parser/gram.y is not the only .y file in the distribution. To call
> ourselves 1.75-safe, we'd have to go through this same exercise
