LR (k) vs. LALR

Profetas <profetas@gmail.com>
9 Aug 2004 00:34:57 -0400

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
LR (k) vs. LALR profetas@gmail.com (Profetas) (2004-08-09)
Re: LR (k) vs. LALR tbauer@cadrc.calpoly.edu (Tim Bauer) (2004-08-10)
Re: LR (k) vs. LALR Colin_Paul_Gloster@ACM.org (Colin Paul Gloster) (2004-08-10)
Re: LR (k) vs. LALR jm@bourguet.org (Jean-Marc Bourguet) (2004-08-11)
Re: LR (k) vs. LALR kamalp@acm.org (2004-08-15)
Re: LR (k) vs. LALR clint@0lsen.net (Clint Olsen) (2004-08-23)
Re: LR (k) vs. LALR jeremy.wright@microfocus.com (Jeremy Wright) (2004-08-25)
[4 later articles]
| List of all articles for this month |
From: Profetas <profetas@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 9 Aug 2004 00:34:57 -0400
Organization: Compilers Central
Keywords: parse, question, comment
Posted-Date: 09 Aug 2004 00:34:57 EDT

What is the advantage of parsers that LALR that is greater than 1? I
have a grammar that requires more than one token of look ahead, is
there any way that it could be solved using yacc or Bison?


Thanks
[Some grammars are easier to express with more than one token of lookahead.
You can rewrite gramars to LR(1), but sometimes at the cost of huge and
ugly bloat. -John]

Post a followup to this message

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