Re: C and LL (1)

Geoff Wozniak <>
8 Nov 2001 23:20:21 -0500

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
C and LL (1) (Pedro Pereira) (2001-10-23)
Re: C and LL (1) (Martin von Loewis) (2001-10-27)
Re: C and LL (1) (Andrew Wilson) (2001-10-27)
Re: C and LL (1) (2001-10-27)
Re: C and LL (1) (Martin von Loewis) (2001-10-28)
Re: C and LL (1) (2001-11-04)
Re: C and LL (1) (2001-11-05)
Re: C and LL (1) (Geoff Wozniak) (2001-11-08)
Re: C and LL (1) (Joachim Durchholz) (2001-11-11)
| List of all articles for this month |

From: Geoff Wozniak <>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 8 Nov 2001 23:20:21 -0500
Organization: Excite@Home - The Leader in Broadband
References: 01-10-121 01-10-134
Keywords: C, parse
Posted-Date: 08 Nov 2001 23:20:21 EST (frigot eric) writes:
> I think you can't parse C with a LL(1) grammar because there is a lot
> of ambiguity in C (30-40 shift reduce with Bison, for exemple).

Do you mean 30-40 s/r conflicts with an LALR parser? If so, I must
have done something stellar because I essentially copied the grammar
from the C99 standard and got 1 s/r conflict (the if-then-else

I had to make a few adjustments with respect to <identifer> and where
it appears, but that was it.

Geoff(rey) Wozniak, Limited Duties Instructor
University of Western Ontario
Computer Science Department
London, Ontario, Canada

GPG Key:

Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.