[#42] Re: possible bug: stack dump with <<-String, #{...} and large loops — ts <decoux@...>

32 messages 2002/05/25
[#43] Re: possible bug: stack dump with <<-String, #{...} and large loops — nobu.nokada@... 2002/05/26

Hi,

[#45] Re: possible bug: stack dump with <<-String, #{...} and large loops — ts <decoux@...> 2002/05/26

>>>>> "n" == nobu nokada <nobu.nokada@softhome.net> writes:

[#46] Re: possible bug: stack dump with <<-String, #{...} and large loops — nobu.nokada@... 2002/05/26

Hi,

[#47] Re: possible bug: stack dump with <<-String, #{...} and large loops — ts <decoux@...> 2002/05/26

>>>>> "n" == nobu nokada <nobu.nokada@softhome.net> writes:

[#48] Re: possible bug: stack dump with <<-String, #{...} and large loops — ts <decoux@...> 2002/05/26

>>>>> "t" == ts <decoux@moulon.inra.fr> writes:

[#49] Re: possible bug: stack dump with <<-String, #{...} and large loops — nobu.nokada@... 2002/05/27

Hi,

[#50] Re: possible bug: stack dump with <<-String, #{...} and large loops — ts <decoux@...> 2002/05/27

>>>>> "n" == nobu nokada <nobu.nokada@softhome.net> writes:

[#51] Re: possible bug: stack dump with <<-String, #{...} and large loops — nobu.nokada@... 2002/05/27

Hi,

[#52] Re: possible bug: stack dump with <<-String, #{...} and large loops — ts <decoux@...> 2002/05/27

>>>>> "n" == nobu nokada <nobu.nokada@softhome.net> writes:

[#53] Re: possible bug: stack dump with <<-String, #{...} and large loops — nobu.nokada@... 2002/05/27

Hi,

[#54] Re: possible bug: stack dump with <<-String, #{...} and large loops — ts <decoux@...> 2002/05/27

>>>>> "n" == nobu nokada <nobu.nokada@softhome.net> writes:

[#55] Re: possible bug: stack dump with <<-String, #{...} and large loops — nobu.nokada@... 2002/05/27

Hi,

[#56] Re: possible bug: stack dump with <<-String, #{...} and large loops — ts <decoux@...> 2002/05/27

>>>>> "n" == nobu nokada <nobu.nokada@softhome.net> writes:

[#57] Re: possible bug: stack dump with <<-String, #{...} and large loops — nobu.nokada@... 2002/05/28

Hi,

[#65] Re: possible bug: stack dump with <<-String, #{...} and large loops — ts <decoux@...> 2002/05/28

>>>>> "n" == nobu nokada <nobu.nokada@softhome.net> writes:

[#84] Re: possible bug: stack dump with <<-String, #{...} and large loops — nobu.nokada@... 2002/05/29

Hi,

[#92] Re: possible bug: stack dump with <<-String, #{...} and large loops — ts <decoux@...> 2002/05/29

>>>>> "n" == nobu nokada <nobu.nokada@softhome.net> writes:

[#67] The warns-a-thon continues... — Sean Chittenden <sean@...>

I'm feeling left out in this race to clobber warnings!!! Attached are

19 messages 2002/05/28

[#104] Re: possible bug: stack dump with <<-String, #{...} and large loops — ts <decoux@...>

>>>>> "n" == nobu nokada <nobu.nokada@softhome.net> writes:

29 messages 2002/05/30
[#105] Re: possible bug: stack dump with <<-String, #{...} and large loops — nobu.nokada@... 2002/05/30

Hi,

[#125] Re: possible bug: stack dump with <<-String, #{...} and large loops — ts <decoux@...> 2002/06/04

>>>>> "n" == nobu nokada <nobu.nokada@softhome.net> writes:

[#126] Re: possible bug: stack dump with <<-String, #{...} and large loops — nobu.nokada@... 2002/06/04

Hi,

[#127] Re: possible bug: stack dump with <<-String, #{...} and large loops — ts <decoux@...> 2002/06/04

>>>>> "n" == nobu nokada <nobu.nokada@softhome.net> writes:

[#130] Re: possible bug: stack dump with <<-String, #{...} and large loops — nobu.nokada@... 2002/06/04

Hi,

[#132] Re: possible bug: stack dump with <<-String, #{...} and large loops — nobu.nokada@... 2002/06/05

Hi,

[#134] Re: possible bug: stack dump with <<-String, #{...} and large loops — ts <decoux@...> 2002/06/05

>>>>> "n" == nobu nokada <nobu.nokada@softhome.net> writes:

Re: yyparse() and friends >> rubyparse() or rbparse()...

From: Sean Chittenden <sean@...>
Date: 2002-05-28 09:08:42 UTC
List: ruby-core #66
> > |All -p does is add a few #defines for build time at the top of
> > |the generated parser.  I think it would be trivial to duplicate
> > |this by adding this to parse.y.
> > 
> > We already have those #defines in intern.h, so do you mean you
> > want to move them to parse.y?
> 
> Hmm... let me look at the code.  Looks like this is even easier to
> solve than we'd thought. Could someone please apply the attached
> patch?  -sc

Err... the previous patch didn't break ruby, but didn't fix my
linking/build problem.  The attached patch, however fixes everything
and does work.  -sc

-- 
Sean Chittenden

Attachments (1)

patch (1.97 KB, text/plain)
? patch
? test.rb
Index: intern.h
===================================================================
RCS file: /src/ruby/intern.h,v
retrieving revision 1.88
diff -u -r1.88 intern.h
--- intern.h	2002/04/26 00:40:28	1.88
+++ intern.h	2002/05/28 07:56:02
@@ -284,12 +284,6 @@
 /* parse.y */
 EXTERN int   ruby_sourceline;
 EXTERN char *ruby_sourcefile;
-#define yyparse ruby_yyparse
-#define yylex ruby_yylex
-#define yyerror ruby_yyerror
-#define yylval ruby_yylval
-#define yychar ruby_yychar
-#define yydebug ruby_yydebug
 int yyparse _((void));
 ID rb_id_attrset _((ID));
 void rb_parser_append_print _((void));
Index: parse.y
===================================================================
RCS file: /src/ruby/parse.y,v
retrieving revision 1.172
diff -u -r1.172 parse.y
--- parse.y	2002/05/22 09:37:45	1.172
+++ parse.y	2002/05/28 07:56:03
@@ -15,11 +15,19 @@
 #define YYDEBUG 1
 #include "ruby.h"
 #include "env.h"
+#include "intern.h"
 #include "node.h"
 #include "st.h"
 #include <stdio.h>
 #include <errno.h>
 #include <ctype.h>
+
+#define yyparse ruby_yyparse
+#define yylex ruby_yylex
+#define yyerror ruby_yyerror
+#define yylval ruby_yylval
+#define yychar ruby_yychar
+#define yydebug ruby_yydebug
 
 #define ID_SCOPE_SHIFT 3
 #define ID_SCOPE_MASK 0x07
Index: ruby.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /src/ruby/ruby.c,v
retrieving revision 1.61
diff -u -r1.61 ruby.c
--- ruby.c	2002/05/23 07:41:53	1.61
+++ ruby.c	2002/05/28 07:56:04
@@ -46,7 +46,7 @@
 VALUE ruby_verbose = Qfalse;
 static int sflag = 0;
 static int xflag = 0;
-extern int yydebug;
+extern int ruby_yydebug;
 
 char *ruby_inplace_mode = Qfalse;
 
@@ -436,7 +436,7 @@
 	    goto reswitch;
 
 	  case 'y':
-	    yydebug = 1;
+	    ruby_yydebug = 1;
 	    s++;
 	    goto reswitch;
 
@@ -612,7 +612,7 @@
 		ruby_verbose = Qtrue;
 	    }
 	    else if (strcmp("yydebug", s) == 0)
-		yydebug = 1;
+		ruby_yydebug = 1;
 	    else if (strcmp("help", s) == 0) {
 		usage(origargv[0]);
 		exit(0);

In This Thread