28 Apr 2005 14:54:46 -0400

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) |

Re: LALR1 and LL1 haberg@math.su.se (Hans Aberg) (2005-05-02) |

From: | haberg@math.su.se (Hans Aberg) |

Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |

Date: | 28 Apr 2005 14:54:46 -0400 |

Organization: | Mathematics |

References: | 05-04-023 05-04-041 05-04-059 |

Keywords: | parse, theory |

Posted-Date: | 28 Apr 2005 14:54:46 EDT |

Karsten Nyblad <148f3wg02@sneakemail.com> wrote:

*> > [Are LL1 languages, as opposed to grammars, LALR languages? -John]*

*>*

*> 1: Any LL(K) language is LR(K).*

Sylvain Schmitz <schmitz@i3s.unice.fr> wrote:

*> > [Are LL1 languages, as opposed to grammars, LALR languages? -John]*

*> Yes, they are:*

*> Any LL(k) language has an LL(k) grammar, which is also LR(k). And*

*> one can transform this LR(k) grammar into an equivalent SLR(1) grammar.*

*> So LL languages are also LALR.*

Do you have any reference? -- Akim Demaille sent me an example where LL(1)

isn't LR(1). :-) I reposted it here, but I have forgotten when. This seems

to ne of the most often quoted mistakes.

--

Hans Aberg

Post a followup to this message

Return to the
comp.compilers page.

Search the
comp.compilers archives again.