Looking for formal definition of LALR(k)

Ziemowit Laski <laski@ics.uci.edu>
17 Oct 1998 02:00:00 -0400

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
Looking for formal definition of LALR(k) laski@ics.uci.edu (Ziemowit Laski) (1998-10-17)
Re:Looking for formal definition of LALR(k) KPRASAD@us.oracle.com (KPRASAD.US.ORACLE.COM) (1998-10-21)
Re: Looking for formal definition of LALR(k) matt@timmermans.no-spam-remove.org (Matt Timmermans) (1998-10-22)
Re: Looking for formal definition of LALR(k) laski@ics.uci.edu (Ziemowit Laski) (1998-10-22)
Re: Looking for formal definition of LALR(k) laski@ics.uci.edu (Ziemowit Laski) (1998-10-24)
| List of all articles for this month |
From: Ziemowit Laski <laski@ics.uci.edu>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 17 Oct 1998 02:00:00 -0400
Organization: Compilers Central
Keywords: parse, LALR, question

Hello,


I am looking for a formal (i.e., algebraic) definition of LALR(k)
grammars, analogous to the existing LR(k) definition.


The dragon book, among others, defines LALR(k) operationally -- that
is, a grammar is LALR(k) if the parser generator accepts it without
any conflicts. In their article on LALR(1) lookahead sets (1982),
DeRemer and Pennello claim they know of "no reasonable way" to define
LALR(k) in a way that "does not involve the parser".


Is anyone aware of any developments since then (published papers,
etc.)? Thanks in advance for your assistance,


Zem Laski
Grad Student, Univ. of California, Irvine

Post a followup to this message

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