Re: code coverage patch

Korry Douglas wrote:
>> 1) Use bison's -o option to put the output file in the right place 
>> directly,
>> if we are dealing with bison (and don't bother to support code coverage
>> analysis with other yaccs), or
>>
>> 2) Run a pattern replacement across the grammar output files as their are
>> renamed.
> 
> Why not use the %output directive in the grammar file instead; that way 
> you don't need to add any special flags to the Makefile.

I think only bison supports that directive.