[PATCH 1/2] flex: Avoid REJECT name conflict.

[Joakim Tjernlund]

Martin Mares <mj at ucw.cz> wrote on 2010/04/29 22:14:16:
>
> Hello!
>
> > `flex' scans your rule actions to determine whether you use the
> > `REJECT' or `yymore()' features.  The `REJECT' and `yymore' options are
> > available to override its decision as to whether you use the options,
> > either by setting them (e.g., `%option reject)' to indicate the feature
> > is indeed used, or unsetting them to indicate it actually is not used
> > (e.g., `%option noyymore)'.
>
> BTW, wouldn't a simple `%option noreject' suffice?

That would only get rid of the warning, but REJECT is still
a reserved word(-Cf still fails). Better that nothing
though.