Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Compilation errors

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Compilation errors
Date: 2007-02-28 23:07:13
Message-ID: 10013.1172704033@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> Actually, we couldn't.The definition section from the .l file gets 
> included after these functions. So we'd need to include something in 
> gram.y before including scan.c.

Actually, since we don't use any of those functions, the following
advice from the 2.5.33 flex manual seems useful:

   A number of options are available for lint purists who want to
suppress the appearance of unneeded routines in the generated scanner.
Each of the following, if unset (e.g., `%option nounput'), results in
the corresponding routine not appearing in the generated scanner:

         input, unput
         yy_push_state, yy_pop_state, yy_top_state
         yy_scan_buffer, yy_scan_bytes, yy_scan_string
     
         yyget_extra, yyset_extra, yyget_leng, yyget_text,
         yyget_lineno, yyset_lineno, yyget_in, yyset_in,
         yyget_out, yyset_out, yyget_lval, yyset_lval,
         yyget_lloc, yyset_lloc, yyget_debug, yyset_debug

   (though `yy_push_state()' and friends won't appear anyway unless you
use `%option stack)'.

However, I'm not sure whether 2.5.4 will choke on unrecognized %option
commands --- if it has to be conditional on version it'll be a PITA.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Simon RiggsDate: 2007-02-28 23:23:32
Subject: Re: COMMIT NOWAIT Performance Option
Previous:From: Sergey E. KoposovDate: 2007-02-28 23:02:27
Subject: Re: SOC & user quotas

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group