This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sourceware.org mailing list for the GDB 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: [RFC/RFA] Wrong documentation for "&&var"?


On Tue, Jan 08, 2008 at 10:31:31PM +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > Not knowing what was really meant at the implementation level, I'm not
> > sure whether this is a parser implementation bug, or an error in the
> > documentation. Paul thought that this was an error in the documentation
> > so, assuming he is correct, I'm submitting this change on his behalf.
> > 
> > So, is this a parser bug or a documentation error?
> 
> The original text was there since the first version in CVS (in 1999),
> so I'm inclined to think it's a bug in the parser.

>From what I know about parsing C, I suggest we go with the
documentation change.  && is a single token, and && NAME is not
currently valid.  It would introduce some ambiguities into the
grammer, I suspect.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery


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