24 Oct 2006 12:36:58 -0400

Related articles |
---|

LL(k) vs Strong_LL(k) anha2k47@gmail.com (Fanta) (2006-10-21) |

Re: LL(k) vs Strong_LL(k) schmitz@i3s.unice.fr (Sylvain Schmitz) (2006-10-21) |

Re: LL(k) vs Strong_LL(k) anha2k47@gmail.com (Fanta) (2006-10-24) |

Re: LL(k) vs Strong_LL(k) Juan.Miguel.Vilar@gmail.com (Juan Miguel Vilar) (2006-10-26) |

From: | Fanta <anha2k47@gmail.com> |

Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |

Date: | 24 Oct 2006 12:36:58 -0400 |

Organization: | Compilers Central |

References: | 06-10-078 <4539C854.8020202@i3s.unice.fr> |

Keywords: | parse, theory |

Posted-Date: | 24 Oct 2006 12:36:58 EDT |

Dear Schmitz,

Thanks for your words. But I wrote " the I've proved that the families

of LL(k) language and families of Strong LL(k) (SLLk)) language are

equal". It's here "language", not "grammar". By that sentence, I mean:

for any LL(k) grammar G, there's a SLL(k) grammar G', such that: L(G)

= L(G'). And ofcouse, each SLL(k) grammar is also a LL(k) grammar.

Thank you very much.

Post a followup to this message

Return to the
comp.compilers page.

Search the
comp.compilers archives again.