|
|
Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| Consider the following grammar. | | Consider the following grammar. |
| <text> | | <text> |
− | A -> C x A | ε | + | A -> C x A | ε |
| B -> x C y | x C | | B -> x C y | x C |
| C -> x B x | z | | C -> x B x | z |
Revision as of 20:39, 10 January 2009
Consider the following grammar.
<text>
A -> C x A | ε
B -> x C y | x C
C -> x B x | z
</text>
- Build the LALR(1) parser table. If conflicts exist, assume YACC's behavior.
- Show the differences to LR(0) and SLR(1) parsers.
- Compact the parse table, eliminating and propagating reductions.
- Show the stack and input states, as well as the parser actions, for the sequence xxzxx.
- Solution
There is a "bug" in this solution: in the compacted table, L3 in state 10 should be in the column corresponding to y (corresponding to the shift to state 11 in the uncompacted table).