This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: ANSIfy cp/parser.c

From: Zack Weinberg <zack at codesourcery dot com>
To: Neil Booth <neil at daikokuya dot co dot uk>
Cc: Per Bothner <per at bothner dot com>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 22:55:09 -0800
Subject: Re: ANSIfy cp/parser.c
References: <20030109030342.GA20609@doctormoo><87bs2r0wpv.fsf@egil.codesourcery.com><20030109065216.GA26264@daikokuya.co.uk><20030109213019.GA735@daikokuya.co.uk> <3E1DF443.1000604@bothner.com><20030109222016.GB1951@daikokuya.co.uk> <3E1E28BC.60500@bothner.com><87k7hdg2rm.fsf@egil.codesourcery.com><20030110064723.GA6839@daikokuya.co.uk>

Neil Booth <neil@daikokuya.co.uk> writes:

> Zack Weinberg wrote:-
>
>> > It would also be nice if the parser(s) were re-entrant, like cpplib.
>> 
>> Yes, except that there has never been a user of cpplib's notional
>> reentrancy and therefore we don't know if it actually works.  I'm
>> inclined to call YAGNI.
>
> YAGNI?  Yet another good? ...?

"You aren't gonna need it."  They say it a lot over on python-dev.

Basically, if reentrancy falls out of the algorithm, like it sounds
like it might, great; but I wouldn't sweat trying to make it be
reentrant if things turn out otherwise.

zw

References:
- ANSIfy cp/parser.c
  - From: Nathanael Nerode
- Re: ANSIfy cp/parser.c
  - From: Zack Weinberg
- Re: ANSIfy cp/parser.c
  - From: Neil Booth
- Re: ANSIfy cp/parser.c
  - From: Neil Booth
- Re: ANSIfy cp/parser.c
  - From: Per Bothner
- Re: ANSIfy cp/parser.c
  - From: Neil Booth
- Re: ANSIfy cp/parser.c
  - From: Per Bothner
- Re: ANSIfy cp/parser.c
  - From: Zack Weinberg
- Re: ANSIfy cp/parser.c
  - From: Neil Booth

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]