Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!usc!apple!oliveb!orc!bu.edu!buengc!bph
From: bph@buengc.BU.EDU (Blair P. Houghton)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: 127 terminals, too few for a decent yacc?
Message-ID: <5645@buengc.BU.EDU>
Date: 11 Apr 90 22:38:31 GMT
References: <5627@buengc.BU.EDU> <87@newave.UUCP>
Reply-To: bph@buengc.bu.edu (Blair P. Houghton)
Followup-To: comp.lang.c
Organization: Boston Univ. Col. of Eng.
Lines: 47

In article <87@newave.UUCP> john@newave.mn.org (John A. Weeks III) writes:
>In article <5627@buengc.BU.EDU> bph@buengc.bu.edu (Blair P. Houghton) writes:
>> I don't know how many terminals I have in there, but yacc
>> refuses to process one of the .y files in something I
>> snarfed, claiming that it can only deal with 127.
>
>When your tools complain about your programming style, perhaps it
>is time to step back and see if there is a fundamentally better
>way to solve your problem.

But it ain't my code.  I bought it (sort of--I paid a ton of money
for what they called "processing and legal" fees...the programs
themselves, I'm told, are "free.").

Anyway, the way I fixed it was to use the .c file that came
on the tape with the software, instead of trying to rebuild
the programs from scratch.  It only happened in that one file.

>> Where do I get a manly yacc, and how old is this bug?
>
>It might just be a "#define".

This yacc came with the system.  If I want a new one, I'll
snarf the byacc that everyone's telling me just showed
up in the sources group.  (Thanks, gang! :)  I'll be doing
this even though I managed to get around the current problem.

>if you have the UNIX sources.  If you do, you should have the
>sources to YACC, and since you are at an "edu" site, there is
>a very good chance of that.

I think what you need here is a lollipop.  A _few_
educational institutions have shelled-out for full site
licenses to the unix sources.  I'm a sysadmin, and I've
only heard it rumored that we have one, and it limits the
people who can see it to a very few among the Director's
inner retinue...whether I believe all or part of this
I'll not say...

>It drives me nuts when programmers use #define to define max 
>whatevers for no particular reason.  Even if the value is very
>large, someone will someday bump into it.

"The only reasonable numbers are zero, one, and infinity."

				--Blair
				  "Who said it, what episode?"