Wed, 20 May 1992 16:52:56 GMT

Related articles |
---|

Hybrid LR and LL parser tools? brueni@csgrad.cs.vt.edu (Dennis Brueni) (1992-05-20) |

Re: Hybrid LR and LL parser tools? ipser@solomon.technet.sg (1992-05-21) |

Parsing Roman numbers joe@erix.ericsson.se (1992-05-22) |

Re: Parsing Roman numbers henry@zoo.toronto.edu (1992-05-24) |

Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |

From: | Dennis Brueni <brueni@csgrad.cs.vt.edu> |

Keywords: | LL(1), LR(1) |

Organization: | Compilers Central |

Date: | Wed, 20 May 1992 16:52:56 GMT |

All this talk about LR vs. LL parsing convinces me that each has its own

merits and best applications. For example, a popular design for compilers

is to use a table-driven LR(0) grammar for expressions, and hand-coded LL

(recursive descent) for the rest of the language constructs. This has

proven to produce very fast, simple parsers.

The disadvantage is the labor involved in constructing such a parser,

since not only do you have to hand code the recursive descent component,

but it then must be integrated with the LR component. Definitely not

appropriate for prototyping.

So naturally the question follows:

"What tools exist for generating hybrid parsers automatically?"

*>From the limited number of things I know, correct me if I am wrong, yacc*

produces LR(1) parsers, pccts produces LR(k), ell produces LL(1), lalr

produces LR(1), etc. I know of no parser generater which will produce a

hybrid parser as I describe above.

Thanks in advance,

--Dennis Brueni brueni@cstheory.cs.vt.edu

[yacc and lalr produce LALR parsers, similar to LR(1). -John]

--

Post a followup to this message

Return to the
comp.compilers page.

Search the
comp.compilers archives again.