Re: Crenshaw's Tutorial

"David Thompson" <david.thompson1@worldnet.att.net>
21 Feb 2000 23:56:13 -0500

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
[2 earlier articles]
Re: Crenshaw's Tutorial jcrens@earthlink.net (Jack Crenshaw) (2000-02-05)
Re: Crenshaw's Tutorial joachim.durchholz@halstenbach.com.or.de (Joachim Durchholz) (2000-02-10)
Re: Crenshaw's Tutorial gneuner@dyn.com (2000-02-12)
Re: Crenshaw's Tutorial alanf@ns.net (Alan Fargusson) (2000-02-15)
Re: Crenshaw's Tutorial rhyde@shoe-size.com (Randall Hyde) (2000-02-15)
Re: Crenshaw's Tutorial joachim.durchholz@halstenbach.com.or.de (Joachim Durchholz) (2000-02-17)
Re: Crenshaw's Tutorial david.thompson1@worldnet.att.net (David Thompson) (2000-02-21)
Re: types, was Crenshaw's Tutorial Andrew.Walker@nottingham.ac.uk (Dr A. N. Walker) (2000-02-27)
Re: Crenshaw's Tutorial christian.bau@isltd.insignia.com (2000-03-23)
| List of all articles for this month |
From: "David Thompson" <david.thompson1@worldnet.att.net>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 21 Feb 2000 23:56:13 -0500
Organization: AT&T Worldnet
References: 00-01-073 00-02-01700-02-038 00-02-061 00-02-068
Keywords: parse, algol68, comment

Our Esteemed Moderator commented:
> ... I don't know of any parser that attempts
> to enforce redeclaration rules syntactically. ...


IIRC didn't the Algol 68 Report "look up" declarations by
(conceptually) generating a grammar to carry them into uses?
Unfortunately my brain exploded about 1/5 of the way
through, and some of the pieces are still missing. ;-(
--
- David.Thompson 1 now at worldnet.att.net
[Yeah, I had the same problem. -John]

Post a followup to this message

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