Re: Bison/flex compatibility revisited

[Bruce Lilly]

John wrote:

> We can't guarantee that we will use those macros in the future in
> order to create the prefix namespace. There is a better way to solve
> this without macros at all.
>
> Future revisions of flex may generate the mangled symbols directly,
> instead of passing the buck to the C preprocessor as it does now.

That should work OK w/ bison *if* the bison-generated macros
are not #undef'ed (as is currently the case when the flex-
generated header file that declares the function is included
w/o YY_HEADER_NO_UNDEFS).  However, that won't help use of
flex w/ yacc, byacc, etc. -- there's some dicussion of the
issues in the O'Reilly yacc & lex book.