From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] flex |
Date: | 2000-01-16 01:38:33 |
Message-ID: | 17310.947986713@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
>> Maybe this has been discussed before my time, but why exactly is it that
>> we don't distribute lex'ed files, as with yacc'ed files?
> Not sure. Are they more platform-dependent or lexer-dependent? Doesn't
> the lexer call a lexer-specific library? Not sure.
flex has a lexer-specific library (libfl.a), but as far as I can tell
our scanners don't call it. In fact our build process has no provision
for adding -lfl to the link, which I used to think was an oversight, but
now it's starting to seem like a good idea. We could ship scan.c et al
in the same way we handle the yacc/bison output files, and it should
work everywhere.
If we were going to do this, I'd vote for making sure that *all* the
yacc files are pregenerated (currently, we only take care of the larger
ones), and then most people wouldn't need either flex or bison to build.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2000-01-16 02:03:50 | I think we need an explicit parsetree node for CAST |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2000-01-16 01:31:56 | Re: [HACKERS] Problem with foreign keys and inheritance |