Re: Do I need to invent a new type of parser?

jeffk@ecst.csuchico.edu (Jeffery Alan Keasler) writes:
|> I am especially interested in methods of handling operators which have
|> greater than dyadic associativity. I would also like to know about any
|> good papers available concerning efficient methods of handling arbitrarily
|> long lookahead under heavy overloading of operators.


You should take a look at the parsing and priority resolution scheme used
in SDF. We use a parser that returns ambiguous parse trees and the
priorities are used afterwards for two tree-weeding phases: First all
trees that contain priority conflicts are removed, next the same
priorities are used to compare the remaining trees and choose the
``largest'' tree. I am quite sure that all your priority schemes can be
expressed in SDF.


The reference for SDF is:
J. Heering and P.R.H. Hendriks and P. Klint and J. Rekers,
The syntax definition formalism SDF - reference manual,
SIGPLAN Notices 24(11), pages 43-75, 1989


Jan Rekers (Jan.Rekers@cwi.nl) Centrum voor Wiskunde en Informatica (CWI)
                                                P.O. Box 4079, 1009 AB Amsterdam, The Netherlands
--

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