Re: Minor documentation and message issues

[Frank Heckenbach]

Sorry for the late reply.

Akim Demaille wrote:

> >> I think the "@var{char}" option is missing in the "%token" and
> >> "%left" cases.
> > 
> > Also "@var{string}" in "%left".
> 
> Thanks!  I had never realized we could write `%token '+'`.  I also didn't 
> know we could give a string alias to a char-token.  But I'll leave it as is.

We can also set a token number, but it must match the codepoint, e.g.

  %token 'a' 97

works, but:

  %token 'a' 98

doesn't ("redefining code of token 'a'").

So should this be allowed at all?

> I think this is right now, do you agree?

Almost, I think. Reading the new wording, it looks like this is
allowed, but it doesn't seem to be ("unexpected integer literal").
Should it be?

%token a "a"
%left "a" 42