yacc or bison?

pkeddie@axion.bt.co.uk (Paul Keddie)
Wed, 15 Apr 1992 13:47:41 GMT

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
yacc or bison? pkeddie@axion.bt.co.uk (1992-04-15)
Re: yacc or bison? eric@pencom.com (1992-04-16)
Re: yacc or bison? graham@maths.su.oz.au (1992-04-22)
Re: yacc or bison? bliss@sp64.csrd.uiuc.edu (1992-04-22)
| List of all articles for this month |

Newsgroups: comp.compilers
From: pkeddie@axion.bt.co.uk (Paul Keddie)
Keywords: yacc, parse, question
Organization: British Telecom Research Labs
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 13:47:41 GMT

Dear all,
                    No doubt this question has been asked before, but here goes. I
am about to write a simple C parser using yacc or bison (both of which are
available to me). My question is simple. Which do I use? What are the pros
and cons of both? Also, do people feel put off using bison because bison
grammars can only be used in programs that are free software (or has this
now changed)? My boss is particular worried by this last point! Cheers
in advance,

Software Maintenance Group, Software Technology Division, BT
Research Labs, Martlesham Heath, Ipswich, IP5 7RE, UK
E-mail: pkeddie@axion.bt.co.uk
Phone: +44 473 649154 Fax: +44 473 643019
[There are actually three versions of yacc commonly available for Unix
systems -- the original AT&T yacc, bison, and Robert Corbett's Berkeley
yacc. Bison is derived from an earlier version of Corbett's work but is
now considerably different from Berkeley yacc. Each has different legal
status: AT&T yacc is subject to AT&T license but parsers created from it
may be distributed without restriction, bison is free but bison parsers
are subject to the GNU copyleft, and Corbett's work is in the public
domain. Technically, bison has more sophisticated error recovery and
fancier debugging than the other two. Personally, I'd use Berkeley yacc.

Post a followup to this message

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