Re: FYI: default %printer/%destructor

[Joel E. Denny]

On Tue, 21 Nov 2006, Hans Aberg wrote:

> But here, the LHSs should somehow be adapted to Bison notation.

I think this is the key.  We can't hope to avoid collisions with every 
notation Bison might possibly want to use in the future or that users 
might already be familiar with.  There are only so many characters on the 
keyboard.  Bison will have to develop its own alternatives in some cases.  
However, using () in a grammar to group symbols is pervasive in my 
experience, and so we might ought to avoid using it for other purposes.  
I suspect that using [] in a grammar to mean optional is not nearly as 
common.

> I think "[ ]" will work much
> better than "(...)?", which is sometimes used - one needs to attach actions to
> these EBNF constructs as well, and postfix operators like "?" may cause
> problems.

I don't follow.