Re: FYI: bison-1.875 lets gcc bootstraps fail
> From: Akim Demaille <email@example.com>
> Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 14:36:49 +0100
> We need "%expect 1, 2", since for instance in GLR/BT you are "allowed"
> to have rr conflicts.
> But in the present case, in the future, we need no additional flag or
> feature, we simply need the warning to turn into a hard error. Bison
> is wrong, it needs to give some delay to the users, but once the delay
> passed, it should go back to where it should always have been.
Perhaps after Bison 2.0 comes out, we should have a "stable" branch
that has just bug fixes and is suitable for people who can't or don't
want to change their grammars, and a "main" branch that has useful but
incompatible changes like these. Or on second thought maybe not; it'd
be more work (and more confusing) to have two public branches. (Can
you tell that I don't feel decisive right now? :-)