Re: Syntax

drw@cantor.mit.edu (Dale R. Worley)
Tue, 3 Dec 1991 17:08:01 GMT

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
Current work in compiler/language design. hackeron@Athena.MIT.EDU (Harris L. Gilliam - MIT Project Athena) (1991-11-10)
Syntax andy@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (1991-11-27)
Re: Syntax drw@cantor.mit.edu (1991-12-03)
Re: Syntax salomon@silver.cs.umanitoba.ca (1991-12-04)
Re: Syntax rockwell@socrates.umd.edu (Raul Deluth Miller-Rockwell) (1991-12-05)
Re: Syntax buzzard@eng.umd.edu (1991-12-05)
Re: Syntax ea08+@andrew.cmu.edu (Eric A. Anderson) (1991-12-05)
Re: Syntax gaynor@remus.rutgers.edu (1991-12-05)
Re: Syntax kend@data.rain.com (1991-12-04)
| List of all articles for this month |
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
From: drw@cantor.mit.edu (Dale R. Worley)
Keywords: syntax
Organization: MIT Dept. of Tetrapilotomy, Cambridge, MA, USA
References: 91-11-030 91-12-004@comp.compilers>
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 1991 17:08:01 GMT

In article 91-12-004 andy@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (Andy Freeman) writes:


      [...] the "infix" languages don't agree on
      precedence because people don't, at least for operators other than *, +,
      -, and /. (BTW - There isn't even agreement on how consecutive - and /s
      are grouped.)


It's worse than that -- in Snobol 4, "-" has a lower precedence than
"+", that is, "a + b - c + d" is parsed as "(a + b) - (c + d)".
Similarly for "*" and "/".


And let's not forget associativity -- how is "a ** b ** c" to be
parsed?


Dale Worley Dept. of Math., MIT drw@math.mit.edu
--

Post a followup to this message

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