LALR1 and LL1

Neelesh Bodas <neelesh.bodas@gmail.com>
11 Apr 2005 00:14:46 -0400

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
LALR1 and LL1 neelesh.bodas@gmail.com (Neelesh Bodas) (2005-04-11)
Re: LALR1 and LL1 schmitz@i3s.unice.fr (Sylvain Schmitz) (2005-04-16)
Re: LALR1 and LL1 148f3wg02@sneakemail.com (Karsten Nyblad) (2005-04-26)
Re: LALR1 and LL1 schmitz@i3s.unice.fr (Sylvain Schmitz) (2005-04-26)
Re: LALR1 and LL1 haberg@math.su.se (2005-04-28)
Re: LALR1 and LL1 148f3wg02@sneakemail.com (Karsten Nyblad) (2005-04-30)
Re: LALR1 and LL1 schmitz@i3s.unice.fr (Sylvain Schmitz) (2005-05-02)
[1 later articles]
| List of all articles for this month |
From: Neelesh Bodas <neelesh.bodas@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 11 Apr 2005 00:14:46 -0400
Organization: Compilers Central
Keywords: parse, theory, question
Posted-Date: 11 Apr 2005 00:14:46 EDT

Hi,
I had a question -
I know that every LL1 grammar is by definition an LR1 grammar. What I
want to know is that :
is every LL1 grammar an LALR1 grammar?
In either case (No/Yes), I would be thankful if I could get a
counterexample/proof for the claim or any pointers for the same.


Thanks,
Neelesh

Post a followup to this message

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