|DFAs,NFAs,REs,CFGs,PDAs ARGH! tony@transCendenZ.co.uk (Anthony Webster) (2003-08-04)|
|Re: DFAs,NFAs,REs,CFGs,PDAs ARGH! firstname.lastname@example.org (2003-08-10)|
|Re: DFAs,NFAs,REs,CFGs,PDAs ARGH! email@example.com (Thomas Skora) (2003-08-10)|
|Re: DFAs,NFAs,REs,CFGs,PDAs ARGH! derkgwen@HotPOP.com (Derk Gwen) (2003-08-10)|
|Re: DFAs,NFAs,REs,CFGs,PDAs ARGH! firstname.lastname@example.org (Joachim Durchholz) (2003-08-23)|
|From:||Thomas Skora <email@example.com>|
|Date:||10 Aug 2003 10:50:27 -0400|
|Posted-Date:||10 Aug 2003 10:50:27 EDT|
"Anthony Webster" <tony@transCendenZ.co.uk> writes:
> I'm still a little confused as to which data structure to use for
> what part of the system.
In most cases you can describe the automatas with tabulars, from which
you can look up the next state and/or output with the actual state and
> I understand the mechanics of things like CFGs and PDAs but fail to
> see exactly where they fit in the implementation of a lexer/parser.
The lexer works with DFAs and outputs tokens, while the parser gets
the tokens and builds a parse tree or does something else
grammar-specific with PDAs.
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.