Re: flex for windows

"Gary R. Van Sickle" <agdjh@gasjgdjagjdagdgaj.com>
Sun, 6 Jan 2008 18:03:32 -0500 (EST)

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
[6 earlier articles]
Re: flex for windows Horand.Gassmann@dal.ca (Gus Gassmann) (2007-12-14)
Re: flex for windows timothyprince@sbcglobal.net (tim prince) (2007-12-14)
Re: flex for windows DrDiettrich1@aol.com (Hans-Peter Diettrich) (2008-01-06)
Re: flex for windows DrDiettrich1@aol.com (Hans-Peter Diettrich) (2008-01-06)
Re: flex for windows dickey@saltmine.radix.net (Thomas Dickey) (2008-01-06)
Re: flex for windows dickey@saltmine.radix.net (Thomas Dickey) (2008-01-06)
Re: flex for windows agdjh@gasjgdjagjdagdgaj.com (Gary R. Van Sickle) (2008-01-06)
Re: flex for windows tprince@computer.org (Tim Prince) (2008-01-06)
Re: flex for windows DrDiettrich1@aol.com (Hans-Peter Diettrich) (2008-01-07)
Re: flex for windows cfc@shell01.TheWorld.com (Chris F Clark) (2008-01-07)
Re: flex for windows rlb@hoekstra-uitgeverij.nl (2008-01-09)
Re: flex for windows monnier@iro.umontreal.ca (Stefan Monnier) (2008-01-21)
| List of all articles for this month |
From: "Gary R. Van Sickle" <agdjh@gasjgdjagjdagdgaj.com>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers,comp.lang.c
Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2008 18:03:32 -0500 (EST)
Organization: AT&T Worldnet
References: 07-12-040 07-12-043 07-12-047 07-12-053 07-12-056
Keywords: lex, Windows
Posted-Date: 06 Jan 2008 18:03:32 EST

> Cygwin configures and builds current flex "out of the box," and I get
> only 1 adverse indication in the testsuite.


Unfortunately that's not entirely true. If you're using Cygwin's
"text mode mounts", current flex will compile fine, but the scanners
it generates are uncompilable, due to our old friend "The Inability Of
21st Century Computer Science To Solve The Clearly Intractable And
Apparently NP-Hard "\r\n" Vs. "\n" EOL Problem". For reasons I've
been unable to determine or correct, no matter what you do the
generated source has extra EOLs and "Pseudo-EOLs" (things like
"\r\r\n").


> Your recommendation to
> use linux amounts to using a posix environment, more so than
> cygwin. So, I'm not convinced by any of these suggestions that
> avoiding posix emulations makes it easier.


True enough, but step 1 is that it has to generate usable output.

Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.