Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.
| Related articles |
|---|
| From: | Kaz Kylheku <480-992-1380@kylheku.com> |
| Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
| Date: | Sun, 23 Jan 2022 06:17:36 -0000 (UTC) |
| Organization: | A noiseless patient Spider |
| References: | 22-01-059 22-01-083 22-01-090 22-01-096 |
| Injection-Info: | gal.iecc.com; posting-host="news.iecc.com:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:676f:7373:6970"; logging-data="43826"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@iecc.com" |
| Keywords: | yacc, practice |
| Posted-Date: | 23 Jan 2022 15:07:32 EST |
On 2022-01-22, Ian Lance Taylor <ianlancetaylor@gmail.com> wrote:
> In my experience bison/yacc parsers are really good for knowing the exact
> language that you are parsing.
In my experience, you can easily know what language you're processing
with Yacc is if you avoid its /ad hoc/ features for suppressing conflict
messages. Namely:
- %left, %right and %nonassoc declarations for tokens.
- %prec in rules.
Otherwise, you're likely going to be relying on your regression test
cases to inform you what language you're parsing.
The exception is that %left, %right are readily understood if they are
only used for the operator tokens in the productions for a binary
operator expression grammar (that likely being their motivating use case).
--
TXR Programming Language: http://nongnu.org/txr
Cygnal: Cygwin Native Application Library: http://kylheku.com/cygnal
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.