Re: Unicode Bison

[Akim Demaille]

>>>>> "Hans" == Hans Aberg <address@hidden> writes:

Hans> In think you left out the word "I" here :-); you should have
Hans> written: In the present case, I have not one bit of need for
Hans> Unicode-char-tokens.  :-)

Hans, don't you think it is a good property to limit the number of
tools which require additional complexity to handle such a delicate
problem?  In the current framework, i.e., scanner | parser, don't you
think it is a desirable property for the reliability of the whole
program, that Unicode does not spread all around the place?

We are talking about parsers on top of a token stream, not scannerless
parsers.  In this framework, pushing characters into the parser in
inadequate, and asking for troubles.

As far as I'm concerned, I've said and explained it all, I don't plan
to continue this discussion.