LALR(1)- but not LR(1)-conflict

holzmuel@kafka.informatik.uni-stuttgart.de (Bernd Holzmueller)
Tue, 31 Jan 1995 15:52:14 GMT

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
LALR(1)- but not LR(1)-conflict holzmuel@kafka.informatik.uni-stuttgart.de (1995-01-31)
Re: LALR(1)- but not LR(1)-conflict adam@index.ping.dk (1995-02-02)
Re: LALR(1)- but not LR(1)-conflict salomon@silver.cs.umanitoba.ca (1995-02-03)
Re: LALR(1)- but not LR(1)-conflict Robert.Corbett@Eng.Sun.COM (1995-02-04)
Re: LALR(1)- but not LR(1)-conflict frederic.tendeau@inria.fr (1995-02-09)
Re: LALR(1)- but not LR(1)-conflict ludemann@netcom.com (1995-02-12)
Re: LALR(1)- but not LR(1)-conflict adam@index.ping.dk (1995-02-18)
| List of all articles for this month |
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
From: holzmuel@kafka.informatik.uni-stuttgart.de (Bernd Holzmueller)
Keywords: question, parse, LR(1)
Organization: Computer Science Department, University of Stuttgart
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 1995 15:52:14 GMT

Does anybody know of a concrete example of an LALR(1)-conflict in an existing
(or hypothetical but semantically meaningful) programming language grammar
which is *exactly* LALR(1), i.e. the conflict is solved by moving to LR(1)?


Any suggestions would be highly appreciated.


Thanks, Bernd


--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bernd Holzmueller Breitwiesenstrasse 20-22
Programming Language Group 70565 Stuttgart, Germany
Computer Science Department Phone: +49 711-7816-375
University of Stuttgart, Germany Fax: +49 711-7816-380


email: holzmuel@informatik.uni-stuttgart.de
--

Post a followup to this message

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