Akim Demaille <address@hidden> writes:
So, what is our attitude? If we start worrying about such bugs,
we might as well document it in the FAQ. Or we can have configure
issue a warning stating that
W.L. Estes doesn't care about generating code for pre-C99,
so examples/calc++ is likely to fail
? Or be robust to that bug?
The bug is in the code that flex generates; it has nothing to do with
how we use the code. It's not clear to me how Bison could work around
the bug in general.
I have documented the problem in the Bison manual, as follows:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bison-patches/2006-02/msg00035.html