| F.L. DeRemer. Simple LR(k) grammars. Comm. ACM, 14:453--460, 1971. |
....G = V; Sigma; Pi; ffi n) according to its syntax. The notation used is V for the set of nonterminal, Sigma for the set of terminals, Pi for the rules, ffi n for the initial nonterminal, and ffl for the empty string. We assume that, by some appropriate parser construction technique (e.g. [12, 6, 1]) we mechanically produce from the grammar G a parser for the language L(G) in the form of a (possibly non deterministic) push down transducer (PDT) T G . The output of each possible computation of the parser is a sequence of rules in Pi 7 to be used in a left to right reduction of the input ....
....5 Griffith Petrick actually use Turing machines for pedagogical reasons. 6 The original intent of [15] was to show how one can generate efficient general CF chart parsers, by first producingthe PDT with the efficient techniques for deterministic parsing developed for the compiler technology [6, 12, 1]. This idea was later successfully used by Tomita [31] who applied it to LR(1) parsers [6, 1] and later to other pushdown based parsers [32] 7 Implementations usually denote these rules by their index in the set Pi. 8 Actual implementations use output symbols from Pi[ Sigma, since rules ....
[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]
DeRemer, F.L. 1971 Simple LR(k) Grammars. Communications ACM 14(7): 453-460.
....automatons [Chapman 1987; Aho et al. 1986] and thus to impractically big parsers. Fortunately, most realistic formal languages are already amenable to treatment by SLR or LALR parsers which introduce lookahead into essentially LR(0) parsers. The SLR(k) parser corresponding to an LR(0) parser [DeRemer 1971] with states q (0) 0 ; q (0) n has states closures q 0 ; qn . In contrast to the LR(k) parser, the SLR(k) automaton has the following states: q i : fA ff Delta fi (ae) j A ff Delta fi 2 q (0) i ; ae 2 follow k (A)g In the definition, follow k (A) is the set of all ....
DeRemer, F. L. 1971. Simple LR(k) grammars. Communications of the ACM 14, 7, 453--460.
....[12] to the chart schemata of [16] which are now a widely accepted reference. Thus a construction proposed for general PDTs is de facto applicable to most left to right parsing schemata, and allows in particular the use of well established PDT construction techniques (e.g. precedence, LL(k) LR(k) [8, 14, 2]) for general CF parsing. In this earlier paper, our basic algorithm is proved correct, and its complexity is shown to be O(n 3 ) i.e. as good as the best general parsing algorithms 2 . As is usual with Earley s construction 3 , the theoretical complexity bound is rarely attained, and the ....
....parsing schema without loss of the correctness and complexity properties, as well as the specialization of the optimization techniques (see [18] established in the general case. The examples presented later were obtained with an adaptation of this general algorithm to bottom up LALR(1) parsers [8]. Our aim is to parse sentences in the language L(G) generated by a CF phrase structure grammar G = V; Sigma; Pi; ffi n) according to its syntax. The notation used is V for the set of nonterminal, Sigma for the set of terminals, Pi for the rules, and ffi n for the initial nonterminal. ....
[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]
DeRemer, F.L. 1971 Simple LR(k) Grammars. Communications ACM 14(7): 453-460.
No context found.
F.L. DeRemer. Simple LR(k) grammars. Comm. ACM, 14:453--460, 1971.
No context found.
DeRemer, F.L. 1971 Simple LR(k) Grammars. Communications ACM 14(7): 453460.
Online articles have much greater impact More about CiteSeer.IST Add search form to your site Submit documents Feedback
CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC