From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30784 invoked by alias); 4 Oct 2002 21:49:00 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 30773 invoked from network); 4 Oct 2002 21:48:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 4 Oct 2002 21:48:59 -0000 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (nat-pool-rdu-dmz.redhat.com [172.16.52.200]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g94LTkX06013 for ; Fri, 4 Oct 2002 17:29:46 -0400 Received: from potter.sfbay.redhat.com (potter.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.27.15]) by int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g94Lmql31684; Fri, 4 Oct 2002 17:48:52 -0400 Received: from redhat.com (dhcp-172-16-25-149.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.25.149]) by potter.sfbay.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g94Lmpw17207; Fri, 4 Oct 2002 14:48:51 -0700 Message-ID: <3D9E0C8F.9C62674@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 04 Oct 2002 14:49:00 -0000 From: Michael Snyder Organization: Red Hat, Inc. X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Klee Dienes CC: Stan Shebs , Adam Fedor , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Add rules for ObjC files References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-10/txt/msg00143.txt.bz2 Klee Dienes wrote: > > I definitely agree there's no need to conditionalize them long-term. I > just mean there's no way that I know of to check them in with an #ifdef > WITH_OBJC for the period where the other changes that they depend on > are still being submitted. The objc-lang.y approach has the advantage > that the file can be submitted, and optionally enabled or disabled in > the Makefile (as I believe Adam was planning to do). I agree that ObjC is to C as C++ is to C, and therefore its grammar can legitimately go into c-exp.y. If cxx-like behavior is not disabled when debugging C, then objc-like behavior shouldn't need to be either (unles there's a conflict). But, just to get over the initial hurdle, it might be easier to check the grammar in as if it was a whole new language (and thus can't break C debugging) -- then merge them later. Michael > > On Friday, October 4, 2002, at 12:48 PM, Stan Shebs wrote: > > > ObjC is supposed to be a strict superset of C, so at least in theory, > > extensions don't need to be conditionalized at all, or they can be > > disallowed after parsing, if you wanted to have a "strict C mode" > > (although I note that the little array@45 extension is always > > available, > > even though it's not valid C).