Re: Parsing techniques

icedancer@ibm.net (Ken Walter)
3 Dec 1996 20:46:02 -0500

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
[2 earlier articles]
Re: Parsing techniques simonh@swidev.demon.co.uk (1993-05-08)
Parsing techniques kentr@rollinssoft.com (Kent Rollins) (1996-11-26)
Re: Parsing techniques scotts@metaware.com (Scott Stanchfield) (1996-12-01)
Re: Parsing techniques jon@mauney.com (1996-12-01)
Re: Parsing techniques miano@worldnet.att.net (1996-12-01)
Re: Parsing techniques jlilley@empathy.com (1996-12-01)
Re: Parsing techniques icedancer@ibm.net (1996-12-03)
Re: Parsing techniques house@usq.edu.au (Ron House) (1996-12-07)
Re: Parsing techniques grosch@cocolab.sub.com (1996-12-09)
Re: Parsing techniques parrt@MageLang.com (Terence Parr) (1996-12-09)
Re: Parsing techniques parrt@MageLang.com (Terence Parr) (1996-12-09)
Re: Parsing techniques sjmeyer@crl.com (1996-12-15)
| List of all articles for this month |
From: icedancer@ibm.net (Ken Walter)
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 3 Dec 1996 20:46:02 -0500
Organization: Solution Technology
References: 96-11-15796-11-157 96-12-024
Keywords: parse

jlilley@empathy.com (John Lilley) writes:
> PCCTS also performs intelligent analysis when k>1 to avoid
> exponential explosion of the leading sets. I have heard but cannot
> confirm that LALR(k>1) is almost impossible for complex grammars.
> Does anyone else have experience regarding LALR(k>1)? I'd like to
> know for sure...


I had a LR(k) parser that only did "k" for the "states" that were not
LR(1), that where not LALR(1), that were not LR(0). Only needed this
at a few point in my Algol68 parser, so no explosion.




Actually it didn't look at "strings" of length k, but at the kth
token. I found that usually the strings were identical before that.
The combinations U A, U B, V A, V B where U A and V B were together in
one set and U B and V A in another was uncommon.


Ken Walter
--

Post a followup to this message

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