Re: LL(1) vs LALR(1) parsers

elliottc@logica.com
Fri, 24 Nov 1995 02:54:41 GMT

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
[2 earlier articles]
Re: LL(1) vs LALR(1) parsers sc@iaxp01.inf.uni-jena.de (Sebastian Schmidt) (1995-11-10)
Re: LL(1) vs LALR(1) parsers the_tick@access5.digex.net (1995-11-10)
Re: LL(1) vs LALR(1) parsers parrt@lonewolf.parr-research.com (1995-11-14)
Re: LL(1) vs LALR(1) parsers simmons@bnr.ca (steve (s.s.) simmons) (1995-11-15)
Re: LL(1) vs LALR(1) parsers parrt@parr-research.com (Terence John Parr) (1995-11-20)
Re: LL(1) vs LALR(1) parsers bill@amber.ssd.hcsc.com (1995-11-22)
Re: LL(1) vs LALR(1) parsers elliottc@logica.com (1995-11-24)
Re: LL(1) vs LALR(1) parsers jgj@ssd.hcsc.com (1995-11-28)
Re: LL(1) vs LALR(1) parsers will@ccs.neu.edu (1995-11-28)
Re: LL(1) vs LALR(1) parsers ddean@dynastar.cs.princeton.edu (1995-11-28)
Re: LL(1) vs LALR(1) parsers napi@ms.mimos.my (1995-11-28)
Re: LL(1) vs LALR(1) parsers ok@cs.rmit.edu.au (1995-11-29)
Re: LL(1) vs LALR(1) parsers mparks@oz.net (1995-11-29)
[13 later articles]
| List of all articles for this month |
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
From: elliottc@logica.com
Keywords: parse, LL(1), LALR
Organization: Logica UK Ltd.
References: 95-11-051 95-11-086
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 1995 02:54:41 GMT

Saileshwar Krishnamurthy <krish@cs.purdue.edu> wrote:


>However most standard grammars will not need conversion to make them
>LR.


LR parsers have many other advantages over LL(1) parsers, apart from
the fact that they don't usually require conversion.


For programming language parsing, the most important factor is
probably that an LR parser can recognise a syntax error in the input
stream as soon as it is possible to do so. This makes error message
output *much* easier.


Charles
---
elliottc@logica.com
--

Post a followup to this message

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