[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Flex vs. POSIX 1003.2-1992 repeat operator {} precedence
From: |
Hans Aberg |
Subject: |
Re: Flex vs. POSIX 1003.2-1992 repeat operator {} precedence |
Date: |
Sun, 28 Apr 2002 12:09:11 +0200 |
At 14:53 -0700 2002/04/27, John W. Millaway wrote:
>The standard is not our master.
If there is something wrong with the standard, then the standard should be
changed. -- But one should still be able to write programs compatible with
the standard.
>Keep in mind that this issue is being pressed by SGI employees who have been
>tasked with assuring that the 'lex' binary distributed with IRIX, etc., is in
>conformance to UNIX98 -- a requirement mandated by the U.S. government
>for all
>unix purchases. In other words, if SGI lex doesn't support the posix semantics
>for "ab{3}", then the U.S. government can conceivably refuse to purchase SGI
>equipment. SGI plans to modify flex to behave according to the standard, then
>distribute it as 'lex' (which they are perfectly free to do.)
>
>However, while there are pressing demands at SGI to modify flex, there is no
>such urgency elsewhere.
In view of that this is a pit that most unassuming would fall into, should
not Flex issue a warning (that it can be turned off) whenever a expression
of the form ab{n} appears in the input? For example:
Warning, file <name>.l: ab{n} interpreted as (ab){n} (resp. a(b{n})), see
Flex manual ...
Also, would it not be better to have simply one Flex distribution, so that
"lex" can be aliased to "flex -l". What prevents such an approach?
Hans Aberg
- Flex vs. POSIX 1003.2-1992 repeat operator {} precedence, Casey Leedom, 2002/04/26
- Re: Flex vs. POSIX 1003.2-1992 repeat operator {} precedence, Vern Paxson, 2002/04/26
- Re: Flex vs. POSIX 1003.2-1992 repeat operator {} precedence, Hans Aberg, 2002/04/27
- Re: Flex vs. POSIX 1003.2-1992 repeat operator {} precedence, Hans-Bernhard Broeker, 2002/04/27
- Re: Flex vs. POSIX 1003.2-1992 repeat operator {} precedence, John W. Millaway, 2002/04/27
- Re: Flex vs. POSIX 1003.2-1992 repeat operator {} precedence,
Hans Aberg <=
- Re: Flex vs. POSIX 1003.2-1992 repeat operator {} precedence, W. L. Estes, 2002/04/28
- Re: Flex vs. POSIX 1003.2-1992 repeat operator {} precedence, Hans Aberg, 2002/04/29
- Re: Flex vs. POSIX 1003.2-1992 repeat operator {} precedence, Hans-Bernhard Broeker, 2002/04/29
- Re: Flex vs. POSIX 1003.2-1992 repeat operator {} precedence, Hans Aberg, 2002/04/29
- Re: Flex vs. POSIX 1003.2-1992 repeat operator {} precedence, Hans-Bernhard Broeker, 2002/04/29
- Re: Flex vs. POSIX 1003.2-1992 repeat operator {} precedence, W. L. Estes, 2002/04/29
- Re: Flex vs. POSIX 1003.2-1992 repeat operator {} precedence, W. L. Estes, 2002/04/29
Re: Flex vs. POSIX 1003.2-1992 repeat operator {} precedence, Casey Leedom, 2002/04/26
Re: Flex vs. POSIX 1003.2-1992 repeat operator {} precedence, Casey Leedom, 2002/04/30