|Commonality in subset construction and LR set of items construction al cfc@shell01.TheWorld.com (Chris F Clark) (2007-08-24)|
|Re: Commonality in subset construction and LR set of items constructio firstname.lastname@example.org (2007-08-25)|
|Re: Commonality in subset construction and LR set of items constructio email@example.com (Sylvain Schmitz) (2007-08-25)|
|Re: Commonality in subset construction and LR set of items constructio DrDiettrich1@aol.com (Hans-Peter Diettrich) (2007-08-26)|
|Re: Commonality in subset construction and LR set of items constructio firstname.lastname@example.org (2007-08-27)|
|From:||email@example.com (Torben =?iso-8859-1?Q?=C6gidius?= Mogensen)|
|Date:||Mon, 27 Aug 2007 10:56:16 +0200|
|Organization:||Department of Computer Science, University of Copenhagen|
|Posted-Date:||28 Aug 2007 15:49:35 EDT|
firstname.lastname@example.org (Anton Ertl) writes:
> Chris F Clark <cfc@shell01.TheWorld.com> writes:
>>Recently the similarities between the subset construction algorithm to
>>transform an NFA into a DFA and the LR set of items construction
>>algorithm have been repeatedly thrust upon me, so much so that I have
>>a hard time as seeing them as anything but one algorithm.
>>Is this similarity a well known fact that I just somehow didn't learn
> I learned it from a textbook (unfortunately I don't remember which
> one). I think this is not pointed out in most textbooks, though.
The similarity is very prominent in my compiler book (Basics of
Compiler Design), where the SLR construction is shown as creating an
NFA from the productions and then using the subset construction to
make a DFA (in tabular form), after which you add reduce actions to
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.