Re: Parsing multiple inputs, was Why no shift-shift conflicts?

Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de>
Fri, 28 Jan 2022 19:19:49 -0000 (UTC)

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
Why no shift-shift conflicts? costello@mitre.org (Roger L Costello) (2022-01-25)
Re: Why no shift-shift conflicts? 480-992-1380@kylheku.com (Kaz Kylheku) (2022-01-28)
Re: Why no shift-shift conflicts? anw@cuboid.co.uk (Andy Walker) (2022-01-28)
Re: Parsing multiple inputs, was Why no shift-shift conflicts? tkoenig@netcologne.de (Thomas Koenig) (2022-01-28)
Re: Parsing multiple inputs, was Why no shift-shift conflicts? anw@cuboid.co.uk (Andy Walker) (2022-01-28)
| List of all articles for this month |
From: Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2022 19:19:49 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: news.netcologne.de
References: 22-01-112 22-01-115 22-01-116
Injection-Info: gal.iecc.com; posting-host="news.iecc.com:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:676f:7373:6970"; logging-data="73900"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@iecc.com"
Keywords: parse
Posted-Date: 28 Jan 2022 15:22:06 EST

Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk> schrieb:
> On 28/01/2022 01:20, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
> [...]
>> Since there is only one input stream, there cannot be a shift-shift
>> conflict.
>
> I suppose there is no conceivable use for a parsing process
> that operates on several collateral input streams?


The information about which stream the input comes from has to
be around. Why not simply put an identifier for the input
stream before the data, and build a conventional parser?


Even a state machine with several inputs can be viewed as
processing several input streams.

Post a followup to this message

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