Re: gnubol: subsets

[Tim Josling <TIMJOSLING@prodigy.net>]

Bob,

I agree entirely on relexing. Lex once. The repass is just via the token list in
core.

The preprocessor is a redundant lex in a sense but we have discussed the reasons
for that.

Tim Josling

RKRayhawk@aol.com wrote:

> This is a response to Tim Josling post Dated:   11/21/99 12:48:51 PM EST
> nad quoted below in toto.
>
> Our ideas are similar, but as you say repass, I think we differ in that you
> seem to suggest that you go back to the entire source code  (atleast the
> entire procedure division). Instead I would just hang references onto an
> available tree.






--
This message was sent through the gnu-cobol mailing list.  To remove yourself
from this mailing list, send a message to majordomo@lusars.net with the
words "unsubscribe gnu-cobol" in the message body.  For more information on
the GNU COBOL project, send mail to gnu-cobol-owner@lusars.net.