Re: member with constructor not allowed in union

[Hans Aberg]

At 11:31 +0100 2002/03/18, Akim Demaille wrote:
>It seems we are not done yet with the C++ issues.
>
>The problem this time is that we have to throw away your union trick
>to compute the alignments.  We cannot afford to put YYSTYPE (and
>actually YYLTYPE) into a union, as it makes it impossible for C++
>users to use any useful structure in it.

I think that if you now have a C++ skeleton file, that should be put into
the ordinary distribution. Those that want a C++ output should use that
one, not compile the C output as C++.

Then the C skeleton file can be made to work with C only, without worrying
about C++, which is simpler. So, keep the union trick, if you so please.

As for the C output only feature, I think one may need two skeleton files:
One with a purely stack produces an overflow, and one purely dynamic. This
is more memory efficient. But that could be made later at some point (with
the C++ skeleton file in hand, there is no need for rush).

  Hans Aberg