Related articles |
---|
classification of a language -- not ({ww}) linlist@fudan.edu (Linlist Leo) (1999-10-27) |
Re: classification of a language -- not ({ww}) raugfer@uol.com.br (Rodrigo Augusto B. Ferreira) (1999-10-28) |
Re: classification of a language -- not ({ww}) torbenm@diku.dk (1999-10-29) |
From: | Linlist Leo <linlist@fudan.edu> |
Newsgroups: | comp.compilers,comp.theory |
Date: | 27 Oct 1999 14:28:44 -0400 |
Organization: | Compilers Central |
Distribution: | inet |
Keywords: | parse, theory |
I remember once a professor told me a wonderful method to derive
the following language.
{ x | x in (\sigma *) and x <> ww for any (w in \sigma *) }
Namely, it contains words that do not consist of 2 identical front and
hind parts. Now I forget how the grammer looked like and will
appreciate any information about it.
Beside, I also consider the question "Is this language Context Free?"
Surely {ww|w in (\sigma)*} is not context-free (i devised a context
sensitive grammar for it so i guess it is context sensitive). But the
context-free language is not closed for 'complementation' so we cannot
claim not({ww}) is not context-free. And I failed to disprove it by
pumping lemma, too.
BTW, is context sensitive language closed under 'complementation'?
Thanks in advance,
Linlist
--
-------------------------
Linlist Leo
linlist@fudan.edu
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.