Re: XPL Analyzer

"SLK Parser Generator" <slkpg4@gmail.com>
Fri, 09 Jun 2017 08:38:05 -0800

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
XPL Analyzer shoefoot@gmail.com (Shoefoot) (2017-06-05)
Re: XPL Analyzer robin51@dodo.com.au (Robin Vowels) (2017-06-05)
Re: XPL Analyzer gneuner2@comcast.net (George Neuner) (2017-06-05)
Re: XPL Analyzer shoefoot@gmail.com (Shoefoot) (2017-06-07)
Re: XPL Analyzer acolvin@efunct.com (mac) (2017-06-08)
Re: XPL Analyzer slkpg4@gmail.com (SLK Parser Generator) (2017-06-09)
Re: XPL Analyzer gneuner2@comcast.net (George Neuner) (2017-06-09)
Re: XPL Analyzer DrDiettrich1@aol.com.dmarc.email (Hans-Peter Diettrich) (2017-06-13)
| List of all articles for this month |

From: "SLK Parser Generator" <slkpg4@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2017 08:38:05 -0800
Organization: SLK Systems
Injection-Info: miucha.iecc.com; posting-host="news.iecc.com:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:676f:7373:6970"; logging-data="24216"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@iecc.com"
Keywords: parse, history
Posted-Date: 09 Jun 2017 11:20:41 EDT

  From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XPL


"XCOM and XA were subsequently changed to instead use a variant of Donald
Knuth's LR parser bottom-up method.[4] XCOM's variant is called Simple LR
or SLR. It handles more grammars than MSP but not quite as many grammars
as LALR or full LR(1). The differences from LR(1) are mostly in the table
generator's algorithms, not in the compile-time parser method. XCOM and XA
predate the widespread availability of Unix and its yacc parser generator
tool. XA and yacc have similar purposes."


I would suggest using LR, given the power of today's hardware. SLK
generates LR(k) and it was much easier for me to implement than the
LALR(k) that is also supported.


Post a followup to this message

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