Related articles |
---|
RE's to CFG's clive_minnican@hotmail.com (Clive Minnican) (2000-12-18) |
Re: RE's to CFG's cfc@world.std.com (Chris F Clark) (2000-12-19) |
Re: RE's to CFG's philip.fortomas@virgin.net (Philip Fortomas) (2000-12-20) |
From: | "Philip Fortomas" <philip.fortomas@virgin.net> |
Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
Date: | 20 Dec 2000 17:23:13 -0500 |
Organization: | Virgin Net Usenet Service |
References: | 00-12-070 |
Keywords: | lex, DFA |
Posted-Date: | 20 Dec 2000 17:23:13 EST |
Clive,
As John suggests, RegExps (or, better, Regular Grammars defining the
corresponding RegExps) are a pure subset of CFGs. There are ways that
you can use a sample set of regular expressions to derive the Regular
Grammar that will parse all of them in their entirety. I used the
technique while doing a BSc. The process is quite lengthy (and not
absolutely error-free). If you are interested, I will find the
lecture notes and post a further message. I remember that from the
regular grammar that was derived, by using suitable branch merging and
a bit of recursion you could end up with a CFG that would parse all of
the RegExps that were in the sample set and (obviously) more that were
not included in the original specification.
Best Regards
Philip Fortomas
philip.fortomas@virgin.net
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.