Related articles |
---|
no reserved words hugo@morantek.demon.co.uk (1998-03-08) |
Re: no reserved words cfc@world.std.com (Chris F Clark) (1998-03-12) |
Re: no reserved words leichter@smarts.com (Jerry Leichter) (1998-03-13) |
Re: no reserved words will@ccs.neu.edu (William D Clinger) (1998-03-15) |
Re: no reserved words stephen@acm.org (Stephen P Spackman) (1998-03-18) |
Re: no reserved words sandeep.dutta@usa.net (Sandeep Dutta) (1998-03-18) |
From: | Sandeep Dutta <sandeep.dutta@usa.net> |
Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
Date: | 18 Mar 1998 22:52:15 -0500 |
Organization: | mpct Solutions Limited |
References: | 98-03-091 98-03-128 |
Keywords: | parse, syntax |
William D Clinger wrote:
> You might have to resolve a lot of shift-reduce and reduce-reduce
> conflicts, but those conflicts are sort of intrinsic to the grammar of
> your language; you'll have to resolve them somehow no matter what
> tools you use.
My news server seems to have deleted the original post so I am posting
this as a reply. I would agree with the moderators comment about
"don't do that" .. Yacc has been designed for developing LALR(1)
parsers, i.e. the shift reduce conflict should be resolved by One
token look ahead. Languages with no keywords require parsers which
have the capability of more than One token look-ahead. Parser
generators like PRECC (PREttier Compiler Compiler) are far more
capable of generating such parsers. Point your browser to a search
engine and search for Z-notation or PRECC.
Sandeep
--
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.