wheels@mks.UUCP (Gerry Wheeler) (04/26/88)
Oops -- I just posted a reply that stated that the new MKS Toolkit has
a mail program in it. My error. Mail is not included yet. The person
to whom I replied was looking for yacc, and that is definitely in there.
--
Gerry Wheeler Phone: (519)884-2251
Mortice Kern Systems Inc. UUCP: uunet!watmath!mks!wheels
35 King St. North BIX: join mks
Waterloo, Ontario N2J 2W9 CompuServe: 73260,1043lufkin@hpccc.HP.COM (Paul Lufkin) (04/28/88)
[A re-post, but I thought more people might see it here.] Gerry, Would you be so kind as to tell us what the upgrade options will be for owners of previous versions of MKS Toolkit? [ We own one copy of 2.2b and five copies of 2.2d (just arrived). ] Paul Lufkin, Jr. Hewlett-Packard Application Support Division lufkin@hpccc or [hpda|hpfcla]!hpwcso!paul
rivers@xyzzy.UUCP (Usenet Administration) (04/28/88)
I noticed you are including yacc in the new toolkit. What about lex, can we assume that is being included also?
alex@mks.UUCP (Alex White) (04/29/88)
In article <821@xyzzy.UUCP>, rivers@xyzzy.UUCP (Usenet Administration) writes: > I noticed you are including yacc in the new toolkit. > What about lex, can we assume that is being included also? No, you may not assume that is being included. We don't have a lex yet that is of sufficient quality to include. Contrary to popular opinion, lex is not in any way manner or form necessary for using yacc. For that matter the original yacc was written considerably before lex. Probably few real world applications actually use lex - e.g. the Unix C compilers use yacc, but not lex. The awk in the toolkit uses yacc, not lex. Ditto, Eqn. Both find, and expr in the toolkit use yacc - no lex. Lex certainly has its place in life - but in practice I personally usually find that while you may start a program using lex, you end up re-writing it in C anyhow. Mind you, I have written several programs in lex alone.