+ /* There are many possibilities here to consider:
+ - Assume YYFAIL is not used. It's too flawed to consider.
+ See
+ <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bison-patches/2009-12/msg00024.html>
+ for details. YYERROR is fine as it does not invoke this
+ function.
+ - If this state is a consistent state with a default action,
+ then the only way this function was invoked is if the
+ default action is an error action. In that case, don't
+ check for expected tokens because there are none.
+ - The only way there can be no lookahead present (in tok) is
+ if this state is a consistent state with a default action.
+ Thus, detecting the absence of a lookahead is sufficient to
+ determine that there is no unexpected or expected token to
+ report. In that case, just report a simple "syntax error".
+ - Don't assume there isn't a lookahead just because this
+ state is a consistent state with a default action. There
+ might have been a previous inconsistent state, consistent
+ state with a non-default action, or user semantic action
+ that manipulated yychar. (However, yychar is currently out
+ of scope during semantic actions.)
+ - Of course, the expected token list depends on states to
+ have correct lookahead information, and it depends on the
+ parser not to perform extra reductions after fetching a
+ lookahead from the scanner and before detecting a syntax
+ error. Thus, state merging (from LALR or IELR) and default
+ reductions corrupt the expected token list. However, the
+ list is correct for canonical LR with one exception: it
+ will still contain any token that will not be accepted due
+ to an error action in a later state.
+ */
+ if (tok != yyempty_)