Re: Oracle grammar ambiguities and conflicts

Hans-Peter Diettrich <DrDiettrich@compuserve.de>
12 Jan 2006 12:12:46 -0500

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
SQL grammar problem with Visual Parse++ junk@junk.com (John) (2001-07-23)
Oracle grammar ambiguities and conflicts mattblackmon@hotmail.com (matt blackmon) (2006-01-09)
Re: Oracle grammar ambiguities and conflicts grosch@cocolab.de (Josef Grosch) (2006-01-12)
Re: Oracle grammar ambiguities and conflicts derek@knosof.co.uk (Derek M. Jones) (2006-01-12)
Re: Oracle grammar ambiguities and conflicts cfc@shell01.TheWorld.com (Chris F Clark) (2006-01-12)
Re: Oracle grammar ambiguities and conflicts DrDiettrich@compuserve.de (Hans-Peter Diettrich) (2006-01-12)
Re: Oracle grammar ambiguities and conflicts drikosv@otenet.gr (Evangelos Drikos) (2006-01-12)
Oracle grammar ambiguities and conflicts mark.thiehatten@bibit.com (Mark Thiehatten) (2006-01-12)
Re: Oracle grammar ambiguities and conflicts cfc@shell01.TheWorld.com (Chris F Clark) (2006-01-17)
Re: Oracle grammar ambiguities and conflicts mattblackmon@hotmail.com (Matt Blackmon) (2006-01-17)
Re: Oracle grammar ambiguities and conflicts david@tribble.com (David R Tribble) (2006-01-17)
Re: Oracle grammar ambiguities and conflicts parsersinc@earthlink.net (SLK Parsers) (2006-01-19)
[2 later articles]
| List of all articles for this month |
From: Hans-Peter Diettrich <DrDiettrich@compuserve.de>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 12 Jan 2006 12:12:46 -0500
Organization: Compilers Central
References: 01-07-118 06-01-029
Keywords: parse, SQL
Posted-Date: 12 Jan 2006 12:12:46 EST

matt blackmon wrote:


> Lastly, would a LL grammar be more befitting this problem than a LR?


Yes, IMO. It's not so much a matter of the grammar, but a recursive
descent parser is easier to modify than the automatons, produced from LR
grammars. You may need an different parser generator?


DoDi


Post a followup to this message

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