Re: Backtracking yacc

neitzel@ips.cs.tu-bs.de (Martin Neitzel)
Fri, 25 Sep 1992 20:47:09 GMT

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
[11 earlier articles]
Re: Backtracking yacc andrewd@cs.adelaide.edu.au (1992-09-21)
Re: Backtracking yacc sasghm@unx.sas.com (1992-09-21)
Re: Backtracking yacc sasghm@unx.sas.com (1992-09-23)
Re: Backtracking yacc schrod@iti.informatik.th-darmstadt.de (1992-09-23)
Re: Backtracking yacc andrewd@cs.adelaide.edu.au (1992-09-25)
Re: Backtracking yacc sasghm@unx.sas.com (1992-09-25)
Re: Backtracking yacc neitzel@ips.cs.tu-bs.de (1992-09-25)
| List of all articles for this month |
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
From: neitzel@ips.cs.tu-bs.de (Martin Neitzel)
Organization: Inst. f. Informatik, TU Braunschweig, FRG
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1992 20:47:09 GMT
References: 92-09-059 92-09-174
Keywords: LL(1), errors, parse

> ... The stack of a deterministic left
> parser contains the single viable suffix of the sentential
> form that is begun by what is parsed, while a right parser
> knows at best a set of possible continuations.


Is it possible that there is [again] some invalid intermixing of
"parsers" and "grammars" and their respective properties going on?


As long as the grammar at hand has the LL(1) property, shouldn't both
LL and LR parsers be able to make the same consise predictions?
Wouldn't the "set of possible continuations" just have one element?
--

Post a followup to this message

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