Theory about DFA's and f?lex start states

pcj1@my-deja.com
9 Nov 2000 12:11:46 -0500

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
Theory about DFA's and f?lex start states pcj1@my-deja.com (2000-11-09)
Re: Theory about DFA's and f?lex start states broeker@physik.rwth-aachen.de (Hans-Bernhard Broeker) (2000-11-09)
Re: Theory about DFA's and f?lex start states chrisd@reservoir.com (2000-11-09)
Re: Theory about DFA's and f?lex start states pcj1@my-deja.com (2000-11-11)
Re: Theory about DFA's and f?lex start states cfc@world.std.com (Chris F Clark) (2000-11-14)
Re: Theory about DFA's and f?lex start states joachim_d@gmx.de (Joachim Durchholz) (2000-11-14)
Re: Theory about DFA's and f?lex start states ucapjab@ucl.ac.uk (Jonathan Barker) (2000-11-14)
[5 later articles]
| List of all articles for this month |
From: pcj1@my-deja.com
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 9 Nov 2000 12:11:46 -0500
Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy.
Keywords: lex, design
Posted-Date: 09 Nov 2000 12:11:46 EST

I've been writing a scanner generator which has the same notion of
exclusive start states as seen in GNU flex.


However, the implementation I've been working on uses stack
instructions to maintain the current start_state. Thus, rather than
lex rules which explicitly say "BEGIN(COMMENT)", it might say
"PUSH(COMMENT)" and "POP()". I've been describing the automata that
can be used to recognize such grammars as "Deterministic Pushdown
Finite Automata" (DPDFA's).


My reason for posting however is to ask if people know of any research
or investigation into the types of languages that are described by
flex-like regular grammars (ie the combination of DFA's and STATES). Is
there theory for this stuff or are multistate lexers just a pragmatic
incremental improvement on DFA research?


Thanks,
Paul


Post a followup to this message

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