|Is this a some kind of regular grammar? email@example.com (Daniel Shane) (2002-06-28)|
|Is this a some kind of regular grammar? firstname.lastname@example.org (Chris F Clark) (2002-07-02)|
|Re: Is this a some kind of regular grammar? email@example.com (Michael Dyck) (2002-07-02)|
|Re: Is this a some kind of regular grammar? firstname.lastname@example.org (Robert Thorpe) (2002-07-04)|
|From:||"Michael Dyck" <email@example.com>|
|Date:||2 Jul 2002 01:17:47 -0400|
|Posted-Date:||02 Jul 2002 01:17:47 EDT|
Daniel Shane wrote:
> What I need is an integrated solution which combines the lexer and the
> parser at the same time.
Try googling for "scannerless parser".
> Of course the resulting grammar would not be LALR(1), but is there a
> way to build an algorithm that can parse this type of grammar without
> going to a full blown N^3? Surely this grammar must fit somewhere
> between N^3 and N (for LALR(1).
Scannerless parsers mostly seem to be based on non-canonical or generalized
> Unfortunately, with the above grammar construction, we would loose the
> notion of parse tree in the process (i.e. it would be impossible to
> say, ok the document matched now can you show me the detailed
I don't see why that would be the case.
> Does anyone know if there are books or articles which deal with these
> types of constructions?
No books that I know of. Look for papers by Daniel Salomon and Eelco Visser.
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.