An example LL(K) language that is not LL(K-1) ?

klyjikoo <klyjikoo@gmail.com>
Tue, 26 Jan 2010 04:00:10 +0330

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
An example LL(K) language that is not LL(K-1) ? klyjikoo@gmail.com (klyjikoo) (2010-01-26)
Re: An example LL(K) language that is not LL(K-1) ? haberg_20080406@math.su.se (Hans Aberg) (2010-01-28)
An example LL(K) language that is not LL(K-1) ? chakaram@auth.gr (Chariton Karamitas) (2010-02-01)
Re: An example LL(K) language that is not LL(K-1) ? klyjikoo@gmail.com (klyjikoo) (2010-02-02)
Re: An example LL(K) language that is not LL(K-1) ? cfc@shell01.TheWorld.com (Chris F Clark) (2010-02-03)
Re: An example LL(K) language that is not LL(K-1) ? kkylheku@gmail.com (Kaz Kylheku) (2010-02-03)
Re: An example LL(K) language that is not LL(K-1) ? daniel.eliason@excite.com (fortunatus) (2010-02-04)
[9 later articles]
| List of all articles for this month |
From: klyjikoo <klyjikoo@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 04:00:10 +0330
Organization: Compilers Central
Keywords: parse, LL(1)
Posted-Date: 28 Jan 2010 01:19:34 EST

Hi!


I think any LL(K) grammar without semantic actions can be transformed into an
LL(1) grammar...
But i found in resourses that LL(K) is stronger than LL(K-1) ....
I search a lot for an example that can show this...but not found any
and i am currently confusing about this issue.


sue kelly

Post a followup to this message

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