Re: Flex 2.5.23 beta and C++

[W. L. Estes]

On Tuesday, 22 October 2002,18:38 +0200, Hans Aberg wrote:

> Well, Bjarne Stroustrup also made en error on this, and I corrected him, so
> it must be the C++ standardization committee! :-)

Ack. What does he know about c++ anyway? :)

> I think though that the feature is quite convenient though, once one has
> gotten used to it, because all those standard functions do not interfere
> with ones own code. For example, the following becomes possible:

It may have uses, but it breaks code that has worked for over a
decade. I don't have the energy to follow the c++ moving target. It's
been changing for years now and maybe one of these centuries it will
settle down onto something. Until then, my interest in it is going to
be low-to-zero.

> Well, the C++ standard is already here and fixed, it is formally called
> ISO+IEC+14882-1998 and the ANSI version sells for $18 at ANSI. And there
> will be no new revision for another couple of years.

And then what? They'll break some more c++ code? If this is what flex
has to look forward to, then I'm having a hard time seeing why it's
worth the time of the flex maintainers to support c++ scanners.

> So what's there is there.
> 
> I am looking a bit at writing my own Bison C++ skeleton file (variation of
> lalr1.cc). One reason for me compiling the new Flex version is that I want
> to figure out what your current locations look like, so I can sync it with
> my Bison skeleton file.
> 
> I think that under C++, the only thing that makes sense is a class pure
> lexer/parser: I am not sure there is any point in doing a fully function
> pure parser, as one then, when needed can make a new class instantiation.

I suspect you're right on this last. The c++ interface is suffering a
great case of neglect at the moment. That neglect will be how things
stay until at least after the official release, with a few exceptions.

--Will