Re: LR Grammars not in LALR(1) or LR(1)

thp@cs.ucr.edu
25 Sep 2002 23:52:10 -0400

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
[4 earlier articles]
Re: LR Grammars not in LALR(1) or LR(1) tbandrow@unitedsoftworks.com (tj bandrowsky) (2002-09-12)
Re: LR Grammars not in LALR(1) or LR(1) haberg@matematik.su.se (Hans Aberg) (2002-09-12)
Re: LR Grammars not in LALR(1) or LR(1) soenke.kannapinn@wincor-nixdorf.com (=?Windows-1252?Q?S=F6nke_Kannapinn?=) (2002-09-14)
Re: LR Grammars not in LALR(1) or LR(1) haberg@matematik.su.se (Hans Aberg) (2002-09-14)
Re: LR Grammars not in LALR(1) or LR(1) thp@cs.ucr.edu (2002-09-20)
Re: LR Grammars not in LALR(1) or LR(1) haberg@matematik.su.se (Hans Aberg) (2002-09-22)
Re: LR Grammars not in LALR(1) or LR(1) thp@cs.ucr.edu (2002-09-25)
Re: LR Grammars not in LALR(1) or LR(1) Mark.van.den.Brand@cwi.nl (M.G.J. van den Brand) (2002-09-25)
Re: LR Grammars not in LALR(1) or LR(1) Mark.van.den.Brand@cwi.nl (M.G.J. van den Brand) (2002-09-29)
Re: LR Grammars not in LALR(1) or LR(1) haberg@matematik.su.se (Hans Aberg) (2002-09-29)
Re: LR Grammars not in LALR(1) or LR(1) joachim_d@gmx.de (Joachim Durchholz) (2002-09-29)
Re: LR Grammars not in LALR(1) or LR(1) clint@0lsen.net (Clint Olsen) (2002-10-13)
Re: LR Grammars not in LALR(1) or LR(1) cfc@shell01.TheWorld.com (Chris F Clark) (2002-10-13)
[5 later articles]
| List of all articles for this month |
From: thp@cs.ucr.edu
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 25 Sep 2002 23:52:10 -0400
Organization: University of California, Riverside
References: 02-09-014 02-09-029 02-09-068 02-09-092 02-09-097 02-09-126 02-09-130
Keywords: parse
Posted-Date: 25 Sep 2002 23:52:10 EDT

Hans Aberg <haberg@matematik.su.se> wrote:
+ thp@cs.ucr.edu wrote:


+ ... Almost every parser-
+>generation tool has some form of disambiguation rules, so nobody in
+>their right mind submits an LALR(1) grammar to, say, YACC. Rather,
+>they submit a more intuitive and compact ambiguous grammar, one that
+>reflects the semantics of the language, and then use the disambuation
+>rules to make it parsable.


+ Even though precedence rules can be made a part of the grammar:


Hmmmmm. Suppose we have a YACC input that uses disambiguation rules.
Does the standard way of removing the precedence and associativity
ambiguities by introducing new nonterminals and grammar rules always
yield an LALR(1) grammar? It would be nice if that were so.


+ I got the references:
+ http://www.cs.uu.nl/people/visser/ftp/BSVV02.pdf
+ http://citeseer.nj.nec.com/cache/papers/cs/6488/http:zSzzSzftp.cs.uu.nlzSzpeoplezSzvisserzSzpublicationszSz..zSzftpzSzP9707.pdf/visser97scannerles.pdf


+ But I haven't looked it fully up yet.


These appear to be very useful techniques. Do you know if any tool has
been built around them?


Tom Payne

Post a followup to this message

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