[ragel-users] Re: fexec bug in v5.15?

Adrian Thurston thurs... at cs.queensu.ca
Thu Nov 9 21:07:26 UTC 2006

> Hmm, from the point of view of the ragel end user, things would
> automagically work as "expected", no? I don't see where the change in
> semantics is in this case...

fhold would become a control flow statement because of the jump 
necessary to immediately restart. The remainder of the action would 
become unreachable. It's a subtle difference, but I think it's the kind 
of thing that causes people to become confused about the meaning the 


More information about the ragel-users mailing list