Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.
| Related articles |
|---|
| LALR look-ahead sets from item right context grammar? rprogers@seanet.com (Richard Rogers) (2026-01-29) |
| LALR look-ahead sets from item right context grammar? cclark@imachinesinc.com (Chris Clark) (2026-01-31) |
| LALR look-ahead sets from item right context grammar? rprogers@seanet.com (Richard Rogers) (2026-02-07) |
| LALR look-ahead sets from item right context grammar? rprogers@seanet.com (Richard Rogers) (2026-02-28) |
| From: | Richard Rogers <rprogers@seanet.com> |
| Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
| Date: | Sat, 28 Feb 2026 13:43:17 +0000 |
| Organization: | Compilers Central |
| References: | 26-02-004 |
| Injection-Info: | gal.iecc.com; posting-host="news.iecc.com:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:676f:7373:6970"; logging-data="11228"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@iecc.com" |
| Keywords: | parse, LALR |
| Posted-Date: | 28 Feb 2026 12:30:29 EST |
Qwen3-coder just pointed out that what I've described is actually "LALR(1)
with context-sensitive look-aheads," also known by a couple other names. To
get true LALR(1), you'd have to take the union of the FIRST(RCG(i,j)) over
states j containing item i. But that seems silly since it's better and less
code without doing the union :)
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.