[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Renaming muscles
From: |
Akim Demaille |
Subject: |
Re: Renaming muscles |
Date: |
17 Jul 2002 19:11:39 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.4 (Honest Recruiter) |
>>>>> "Akim" == Akim Demaille <address@hidden> writes:
>>>>> "Paul" == Paul Eggert <address@hidden> writes:
Paul> Are the rules numbered through N, or through N-1? If the
Paul> former, I suggest "rule_number_max" for N. This is a common
Paul> naming convention, e.g., C uses INT_MAX for the maximum integer.
Paul> If the latter, I suggest "rule_number_limit" for N. This is
Paul> also a fairly common convention; it is already used by
Paul> bison/lib/hash.c and bison/lib/obstack.c.
Akim> Thanks! That's the scheme we are going to follow then.
Hm. I had forgotten about something: _limit and _max are nice when
you start say at 0. But in the case of symbols (= tokens + nterms),
we have
nsyms = ntokens + nnterms
_limit and so forth don't make a lot of sense.
- Renaming muscles, Akim Demaille, 2002/07/03
- Re: Renaming muscles, Tim Van Holder, 2002/07/03
- Re: Renaming muscles, Akim Demaille, 2002/07/04
- Re: Renaming muscles, Tim Van Holder, 2002/07/04
- Re: Renaming muscles, Akim Demaille, 2002/07/09
- Re: Renaming muscles, Tim Van Holder, 2002/07/12
- Re: Renaming muscles, Akim Demaille, 2002/07/12
- Re: Renaming muscles, Paul Eggert, 2002/07/13
- Re: Renaming muscles, Akim Demaille, 2002/07/16
- Re: Renaming muscles,
Akim Demaille <=