|Ambiguous recursive-descent parsing email@example.com (Paul Stodghill) (2003-03-24)|
|Re: Ambiguous recursive-descent parsing firstname.lastname@example.org (Chris F Clark) (2003-03-30)|
|Re: Ambiguous recursive-descent parsing email@example.com (Thomas David Rivers) (2003-03-30)|
|Re: Ambiguous recursive-descent parsing firstname.lastname@example.org (SLK Parsers) (2003-03-30)|
|Re: Ambiguous recursive-descent parsing email@example.com (Oliver Zeigermann) (2003-04-13)|
|Re: Ambiguous recursive-descent parsing firstname.lastname@example.org (2003-04-27)|
|From:||email@example.com (Gopi Bulusu)|
|Date:||27 Apr 2003 02:20:51 -0400|
|Posted-Date:||27 Apr 2003 02:20:51 EDT|
We are building a dynamic model driven parsing and translation
called SANKHYA Translation Framework (STF).
STF translators can pursue multiple (all) paths and pick the best
match. Although, simple ordering of alternate STML "Model Elements"
often provides a lot more efficient handling of potential ambiguities.
Gopi Kumar Bulusu
Sankhya Technologies Private Limited
Tel: +91 44 2822 7358
Fax: +91 44 2822 7357
Paul Stodghill <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote
> Could someone point me to a good survey of work that has been done on
> recusive-descent parsing that deals with ambiguities in the language?
> I have some ideas for how Tomita-style techniques for managing
> multiple parse "states" can be combined with LL(1) parsing to easily
> parse languages like C++, but I want to make sure that I am not
> re-inventing the wheel.
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.