Re: Tool support for resolving LR conflict

alpanad@gmail.com
2 Oct 2005 02:53:55 -0400

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
Tool support for resolving LR conflict alpanad@gmail.com (2005-09-07)
Re: Tool support for resolving LR conflict torbenm@diku.dk (2005-09-10)
Re: Tool support for resolving LR conflict 148f3wg02@sneakemail.com (Karsten Nyblad) (2005-09-17)
Re: Tool support for resolving LR conflict alpanad@gmail.com (2005-10-02)
Re: Tool support for resolving LR conflict schmitz@i3s.unice.fr (Sylvain Schmitz) (2005-10-04)
| List of all articles for this month |
From: alpanad@gmail.com
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 2 Oct 2005 02:53:55 -0400
Organization: http://groups.google.com
References: 05-09-02705-09-038 05-09-077
Keywords: parse, tools
Posted-Date: 02 Oct 2005 02:53:55 EDT

<snip>
Deremer and Penello describe a method for how you can give a hit to
the user on what is wrong in their TOPLAS article on how to calculate
LALR(1) lookahead sets.
</snip>


Is Deremer's work being used in popular compiler compilers. Also seems
that his tecnique is not quite correct. A paper by Bermudez and
Schimpf on "On the (non-) relationship between SLR(1) and NQLALR(1)
grammars" disproves the claim of Deremer, that says NQLALR(1) is
superset of SLR(1). In the above views, should one use their method?

Post a followup to this message

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