Related articles |
---|
Compiling expressions james.harris.1@gmail.com (James Harris) (2012-12-29) |
Re: Compiling expressions gah@ugcs.caltech.edu (glen herrmannsfeldt) (2012-12-29) |
Re: Compiling expressions mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de (Dmitry A. Kazakov) (2012-12-30) |
Re: Compiling expressions james.harris.1@gmail.com (James Harris) (2013-01-02) |
Re: Compiling expressions james.harris.1@gmail.com (James Harris) (2013-01-02) |
Re: Compiling expressions matzebraun@googlemail.com (matzebraun@googlemail.com) (2013-01-03) |
Re: Compiling expressions torbenm@diku.dk (2013-01-03) |
Re: Compiling expressions james.harris.1@gmail.com (James Harris) (2013-01-03) |
Re: Compiling expressions james.harris.1@gmail.com (James Harris) (2013-01-03) |
Re: Compiling expressions mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de (Dmitry A. Kazakov) (2013-01-04) |
Re: Compiling expressions james.harris.1@gmail.com (James Harris) (2013-01-06) |
Re: Compiling expressions vonbrand@inf.utfsm.cl (Horst von Brand) (2013-01-14) |
Re: Compiling expressions james.harris.1@gmail.com (James Harris \(es\)) (2013-03-07) |
From: | James Harris <james.harris.1@gmail.com> |
Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
Date: | Thu, 3 Jan 2013 12:01:33 -0800 (PST) |
Organization: | Compilers Central |
References: | 12-12-035 12-12-038 |
Keywords: | parse |
Posted-Date: | 03 Jan 2013 15:17:38 EST |
On Dec 30 2012, 7:58 am, "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mail...@dmitry-
kazakov.de> wrote:
...
> Here is an implementation with an explanation of the technique used:
>
> http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de/ada/components.htm#Parsers_etc
Thanks Dmitry. As mentioned I am not looking for a solution at the
moment. Maybe I have spent too long with this to give up and import a
solution now. I may well come back to it though, especially the
comments. It seems to be very clearly explained.
> I extended the method, which fairly old, towards non-associativity (#6),
> advanced parenthesis (#5, keyed parameter associations), and split
> association priorities into left-right pairs. But basically it is still the
> same twin-stack method. Everything is table-driven, of course.
Is it based on a Pratt parser? I see your comment and saw left and
right priorities mentioned. I have never spent the time to understand
Pratt parsers or why they need both. To deal with left- and right-
associativity if I ever need to I was thinking to use the lowest bit
of the precedence - something along the lines of clearing the bit on
one side before a comparison. Then each operator would only need a
single precedence. Or, maybe Pratt parsers use left and right
priorities for cleverer purposes such as an operator in multiple
parts...?
At any rate, have come up with some ideas for a parser. Will post
separately.
James
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.