Re: First vs Predict and LL(*)

alexander.morou@gmail.com
Wed, 7 Jan 2015 08:37:24 -0800 (PST)

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
First vs Predict and LL(*) alexander.morou@gmail.com (2015-01-07)
Re: First vs Predict and LL(*) alexander.morou@gmail.com (2015-01-07)
Re: First vs Predict and LL(*) DrDiettrich1@netscape.net (Hans-Peter Diettrich) (2015-01-07)
First vs Predict and LL(*) slkpg4@gmail.com (SLK Mail) (2015-01-07)
Re: First vs Predict and LL(*) alexander.morou@gmail.com (Alexander Morou) (2015-01-09)
Re: First vs Predict and LL(*) alexander.morou@gmail.com (Alexander Morou) (2015-01-09)
Re: First vs Predict and LL(*) DrDiettrich1@netscape.net (Hans-Peter Diettrich) (2015-01-09)
Re: First vs Predict and LL(*) alexander.morou@gmail.com (Alexander Morou) (2015-01-22)
[2 later articles]
| List of all articles for this month |
From: alexander.morou@gmail.com
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2015 08:37:24 -0800 (PST)
Organization: Compilers Central
References: 15-01-003
Keywords: question, parse, LL(1)
Posted-Date: 07 Jan 2015 16:46:19 EST

On Wednesday, January 7, 2015 7:48:02 AM UTC-6, alexand...@gmail.com wrote:
> ...The main question: what's the functional intent behind the First vs. Follow
> sets, and the goal of the project I'm writing is a recursive descent parser,
> from what's described above, is my classification of LL(*) accurate?


To Clarify: what's the functional difference between First and PREDICT sets.


Tying early in the AM is a bad idea sometimes.


Post a followup to this message

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