Related articles |
---|
Parsing fully context-free grammars lowell@coasttocoastresearch.com (Lowell Thomas) (2005-09-17) |
Re: Parsing fully context-free grammars haberg@math.su.se (2005-09-18) |
Re: Parsing fully context-free grammars lowell@coasttocoastresearch.com (Lowell Thomas) (2005-09-22) |
Re: Parsing fully context-free grammars haberg@math.su.se (2005-09-23) |
Re: Parsing fully context-free grammars paul@parsetec.com (Paul Mann) (2005-10-02) |
Re: Parsing fully context-free grammars haberg@math.su.se (2005-10-02) |
Re: Parsing fully context-free grammars drikosv@otenet.gr (Evangelos Drikos) (2005-10-03) |
Re: Parsing fully context-free grammars paul@parsetec.com (Paul Mann) (2005-10-04) |
[3 later articles] |
From: | haberg@math.su.se (Hans Aberg) |
Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
Date: | 18 Sep 2005 00:44:15 -0400 |
Organization: | Mathematics |
References: | 05-09-067 |
Keywords: | parse |
Posted-Date: | 18 Sep 2005 00:44:15 EDT |
"Lowell Thomas" <lowell@coasttocoastresearch.com> wrote:
> Also, APG always disambiguates to a single parse tree. However,
> looking at the "dangling else", I've found that is easy to get either
> translation from the single parse tree. That is,
>
> if(expr) then {if(expr) then {stmt} else {stmt}}
> or
> if(expr) then {if(expr) then {stmt}} else {stmt}.
>
> It seems to me that this could be generalized to say, in effect, that
> any tree from the forest can be emulated by any other. Does anyone
> know of a contradiction to this?
This is somewhat unspecific. You have two different parses, which generate
two different parse trees. What do you mean with emulating these two
different parse trees from a single one?
--
Hans Aberg
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.