|Unexpected C Parsing Conflict firstname.lastname@example.org (2008-04-25)|
|Re: Unexpected C Parsing Conflict email@example.com (2008-04-26)|
|From:||firstname.lastname@example.org (Paulo Jorge de O. C. de Matos)|
|Date:||Sat, 26 Apr 2008 12:27:40 +0100|
|Organization:||Aioe.org NNTP Server|
|Posted-Date:||26 Apr 2008 13:05:23 EDT|
email@example.com (Paulo Jorge de O. C. de Matos) writes:
> I have found a conflict in parsing C99 which arises from the fact that
> after a mult_expr a '*' (according to bison) can come up which means
> that it can either reduce mult_expr or shift the '*' for yet another
> Now, * comes up as a unary operator and in the pointer definition but
> I can't find how or where they can follow a multiplication. Can
> someone let me know either how to solve this shift/reduce conflict or
> give me a concrete example where a * comes after a multiplication and
> is not a multiplication operator?
I have been able in the meantime to solve the issue. I had missing a
comma in the initializer-list nonterminal symbol definition.
Paulo Jorge Matos - pocm at soton.ac.uk
PhD Student @ ECS
University of Southampton, UK
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.