Related articles |
---|
eliminating left-recursion aegis@mad.scientist.com (aegis) (2006-01-07) |
Re: eliminating left-recursion rjshaw@netspace.net.au (Russell Shaw) (2006-01-08) |
Re: eliminating left-recursion cdodd@acm.org (Chris Dodd) (2006-01-08) |
Re: eliminating left-recursion DrDiettrich@compuserve.de (Hans-Peter Diettrich) (2006-01-09) |
Re: eliminating left-recursion lojiancn@hotmail.com (jackycn) (2006-01-09) |
From: | Chris Dodd <cdodd@acm.org> |
Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
Date: | 8 Jan 2006 11:38:39 -0500 |
Organization: | Compilers Central |
References: | 06-01-013 |
Keywords: | parse, LL(1) |
Posted-Date: | 08 Jan 2006 11:38:39 EST |
"aegis" <aegis@mad.scientist.com> wrote
> Given the following production:
>
> d-declarator: ID | d-declarator '[' constant ']' | '(' d-declarator ')'
> ;
>
> How can I eliminate left-recursion here? The method sketched
> out in 'Compilers, Principles, Techniques and Tools' only
> presents a very simple case...
The method in ASU is fully general -- given a production of the form:
X ::= X A | B
Trnsforiming it into
X ::= B X'
X' ::= A X' | epsilon
is equivalent, but right recursive instead of left recursive. The intuition
behind this is that the original rule is equivalent to (EBNF):
X ::= B A*
The recursive part of the original rule will expand to zero or more 'A'
components, but you eventually have to expand a B, which will go on the
beginning of the rule.
For your example:
X == d-declarator
A == '[' constant ']'
B == ID | '(' d-declarator ')'
so the replacement expansion is
d-declarator: ( ID | '(' d-declarator ')' ) d-declarator-tail
d-declarator-tail: '[' constant ']' d-declarator-tail
for which you might need to expand the first rule as
d-declarator: ID d-declarator-tail | '(' d-declarator ')' d-declarator-
tail
Chris Dodd
cdodd@acm.org
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.