Re: Parsing wars

bburshte@pyramid.com (Boris Burshteyn)
Thu, 3 Sep 1992 17:53:15 GMT

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
Parsing wars dww@inf.fu-berlin.de (1992-08-31)
Re: Parsing wars eifrig@beanworld.cs.jhu.edu (1992-09-01)
Re: Parsing wars horst@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de (1992-09-02)
Re: Parsing wars bromage@mullauna.cs.mu.OZ.AU (1992-09-02)
Re: Parsing wars bburshte@pyramid.com (1992-09-03)
Re: Parsing wars jar@cheops.HQ.Ileaf.COM (1992-09-05)
Re: Parsing wars dww@inf.fu-berlin.de (1992-09-08)
Re: Parsing wars bruce@harry.ugcs.caltech.edu (1992-09-09)
Re: Parsing wars mickunas@m.cs.uiuc.edu (1992-09-10)
Re: Parsing wars bburshte@pyramid.com (1992-09-13)
| List of all articles for this month |
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
From: bburshte@pyramid.com (Boris Burshteyn)
Organization: Compilers Central
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 17:53:15 GMT
Keywords: parse, LR(1)
References: 92-09-027 92-09-006

Andrew Bromage writes:
>Pushing nonterminals onto the token stream, however, is a new one to me.
>I suppose that this would optimise the GOTO tables a bit, but there are
>better ways of doing this, like creating distinct reduce and lookahead
>states (IMHO).


The USSA parser generator builds tables which make no distinction between
terminals and nonterminals. In most cases tables are better or comparable
with YACC. USSA also builds tables for a generator which produces sample
sentences from the described language, like


int ident() { int ident = function_call; }


These sentences can be accepted due to equivalent treatment of terminals
and nonterminals.


Thanks - Boris Burshteyn (bburshte@pyramid.com)
--

Post a followup to this message

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