Re: tetex-20011202 and bison-1.30g don't get along

[Akim Demaille]

>>>>> "Mike" == Mike Castle <address@hidden> writes:

Mike> Whoops.  Deleted Akim's reply, so replying to myself to at least
Mike> keep it in the same thread.

Mike> On Mon, Dec 17, 2001 at 04:08:14PM -0800, Mike Castle wrote:
>> No obvious problems with bison-1.30e.  This is the first
>> compilation error I've encountered with bison-1.30g.

Mike> 1.30h fails with same error.

Mike> I generated a diff of the 1.30[eh] output, but even gzipped,
Mike> it's 12k.  More than I feel comfortable sending via email.  I'll
Mike> put it up on the web in a bit.  Hopefully I'll remember to write
Mike> the URL before I send this email.  (If the list owners want it
Mike> archived, they may to send it out anyway.)

Thanks, there is indeed a genuine problem somewhere.  The diffs are
big, but most of the diffs are irrelevant.  What is not is:

| @@ -471,7 +473,7 @@
|        94,     0,   113,     0,   158,     0,   152,   154,    94,    94,
|         0,   245,   246,   241,   244,   243,     0,     0,   237,   300,
|         0,   271,     0,   291,   200,     0,   194,   198,   248,   260,
| -     139,   178,   180,     0,     0,   262,   125,    94,     0,   124,
| +     139,   178,   180,     0,     0,     0,   125,    94,     0,   124,
|       112,   115,   121,   122,     0,   119,   154,   156,   151,   157,
|         0,   173,   165,   169,   176,     0,     0,   276,   217,   219,
|       223,   225,   227,   229,   209,   211,   233,   213,   235,   215,

in the parser, and

| @@ -1708,7 +1713,6 @@
|      CONST_DEC_PART  ->  const_tok CONST_DEC_LIST .   (rule 33)
|      CONST_DEC_LIST  ->  CONST_DEC_LIST . CONST_DEC   (rule 35)
|  
| -    undef_id_tok       reduce using rule 36 (@7)
|      $default   reduce using rule 33 (CONST_DEC_PART)
|      CONST_DEC  go to state 68
|      @7         go to state 57
| @@ -1852,7 +1856,6 @@
|      TYPE_DEC_PART  ->  type_tok TYPE_DEF_LIST .   (rule 82)
|      TYPE_DEF_LIST  ->  TYPE_DEF_LIST . TYPE_DEF   (rule 84)
|  
| -    undef_id_tok       reduce using rule 85 (@26)
|      $default   reduce using rule 82 (TYPE_DEC_PART)
|      TYPE_DEF   go to state 78
|      @26        go to state 72
| @@ -1944,9 +1947,6 @@
|      VAR_DEC_PART  ->  var_tok VAR_DEC_LIST .   (rule 126)
|      VAR_DEC_LIST  ->  VAR_DEC_LIST . VAR_DEC   (rule 128)
|  
| -    undef_id_tok       reduce using rule 129 (@33)
| -    var_id_tok reduce using rule 129 (@33)
| -    field_id_tok       reduce using rule 129 (@33)
|      $default   reduce using rule 126 (VAR_DEC_PART)
|      VAR_DEC    go to state 86
|      @33        go to state 82
| @@ -3137,8 +3137,6 @@
|      VARIABLE  ->  var_id_tok . @51 VAR_DESIG_LIST   (rule 194)
|      VARIABLE  ->  var_id_tok .   (rule 195)
|  
| -    '['        reduce using rule 193 (@51)
| -    '.'        reduce using rule 193 (@51)
|      $default   reduce using rule 195 (VARIABLE)
|      @51        go to state 252

etc. in the output.

I'll track this down, many thanks!