8 Mar 2007 09:40:37 -0500

Related articles |
---|

expressions -- functions within function mr.waverlye@verizon.net (Mr.E) (2007-03-08) |

Re: expressions -- functions within function ajo@alumni.cmu.edu (Arthur J. O'Dwyer) (2007-03-08) |

Re: expressions -- functions within function mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de (Dmitry A. Kazakov) (2007-03-10) |

From: | "Mr.E" <mr.waverlye@verizon.net> |

Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |

Date: | 8 Mar 2007 09:40:37 -0500 |

Organization: | Compilers Central |

Keywords: | parse, question |

Posted-Date: | 08 Mar 2007 09:40:37 EST |

How would you insert a generic function into the precedence parser?

Actually more specifically, is it possible to insert a representation

of a generic function that has parameters that allows functions with

formal parameters as arguments?

As I thought about the use of an operator precedence parser I

concluded that if I were to encounter an expression that contained a

parameterized function, there would not be a way for me to deal with a

new expression until the original was complete unless I instantiated

another stack to represent the new expression. Example:

a = FN thisFunction( b ,FN thatFunction( c + 1, FN

anotherFunction))

When I start to deal with FN thatFunction which has parameters and

expressions of its own, I would need to start a brand new stack. That

doesn't seem like a good idea. If this were a recursive descent

evaluation just recursively calling the procedure expr0 (the

expression entry point) would be the thing to do. I'm at a loss as to

how I would deal with parameterized functions that have parameterized

functions as expressions.

Would someone mind presenting some ideas that would assist me in

dealing with this problem?

Thanks,

W.

Post a followup to this message

Return to the
comp.compilers page.

Search the
comp.compilers archives again.