Re: Why could the DFA constructed in most compiler books recognize all the prefixes of a CFL?

Volition2k@yahoo.com (Tim Carmack)
12 Oct 2003 19:00:50 -0400

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
Why could the DFA constructed in most compiler books recognize all t Volition2k@yahoo.com (2003-09-30)
Re: Why could the DFA constructed in most compiler books recognize all venkatesha.murthy@windriver.com (Venkatesha Murthy) (2003-10-04)
Re: Why could the DFA constructed in most compiler books recognize all Volition2k@yahoo.com (2003-10-08)
Re: Why could the DFA constructed in most compiler books recognize all Volition2k@yahoo.com (2003-10-12)
| List of all articles for this month |
From: Volition2k@yahoo.com (Tim Carmack)
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 12 Oct 2003 19:00:50 -0400
Organization: http://groups.google.com
References: 03-09-126 03-10-013 03-10-043
Keywords: parse, theory, comment
Posted-Date: 12 Oct 2003 19:00:50 EDT

Do you mean this paper?
<Donald E. Knuth. On the translation of languages from left to right.
Information and Control, 8:607--639, 1965.>
But I cannot find it either from google search or the ACM archives.
Is there a online version of this thesis?


>> > I have read many textbooks on compiling theory and all of them
>> > teach me how to construct a DFA to recognize all viable prefixes
>> > of a CFL but without strict proof concerning why all these prefixes
>> > constitute a regualr language and the DFA constructed could recognize
>> > this regular language. ...


[I don't believe that the Knuth paper is available on-line, but it's in
his new collection Selected Papers on Computer Languages. It's not
scheduled to be published until next April, but comments on Knuth's
web sites and some online bookstores such as Powell's suggest that it's
available now. -John]

Post a followup to this message

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