RFC: "end of file" vs. "end of input" (was: Bison 3.5.90 released)

Hi Frank,

> Le 18 avr. 2020 à 17:08, Frank Heckenbach <[email protected]> a écrit :
> 
> Akim Demaille wrote:
> 
>>  Therefore in most cases it is now useless to define the end-of-line token
>>  as follows:
>> 
>>    %token T_EOF 0 "end of file"
>> 
>>  Rather simply use "YYEOF" in your scanner.
> 
> I'd say it depends. My parsers read from files just as well as from
> command-line arguments (cf. sed/awk) or user input (e.g. an
> interactive calculator). So I'll keep my slightly more general
> wording (you might consider making this Bison's default, but I guess
> it'd be an unexpected spurious change to some users):
> 
>  %token END 0 "end of input"

I was wondering about that.  I really hesitated between both, and
went for "end of file", because it seems more conventional, albeit
less general.  Also, I realized that in French I would never use
the French translation of "end of input"; but maybe I'm biased.

The Java skeleton (which was an exception: it was not displaying
"$end" like the others) used to report "end of input" until I
made them all use the same name
(https://lists.gnu.org/r/bison-patches/2020-04/msg00092.html).

If there's consensus that, by default, "end of input" is more
appropriate than "end of file", let's do that.