Date:	Wed, 29 May 2002 09:16:13 +0300 (IDT)
From:	Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender:	eliz AT is
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: Flex/Byacc file naming question
In-Reply-To:	<3CF36807.17FEA154@hfx.andara.com>
Message-ID:	<Pine.SUN.3.91.1020529091412.27552C-100000@is>
MIME-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

On Tue, 28 May 2002, Ron Schofield wrote:

>   Just curious.. Why would that have anything to do with naming conventions.
> If both Byacc and Flex are available for download as DJGPP Official Releases,
> and since Byacc uses the standard naming convention and flex does not,
> shouldn't one of them be changed for consistency?

There should be no problems in principle to do that, but since the two 
packages have two different maintainers and (I'm guessing) were ported by 
two different people, such disparities should be expected.

To solve this, someone should send the patches to one or both of the 
maintainers to make the two packages behave in the same way.

- Raw text -