Browse thread
[Caml-list] eliminating shift/reduce conflicts
[
Home
]
[ Index:
by date
|
by threads
]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
| Date: | -- (:) |
| From: | Eckart Goehler <goehler@a...> |
| Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] eliminating shift/reduce conflicts |
Hi,
If I understand the ommited part right, the poor parser below seems te
have the burden to decide which rule to use when a "FOO" occurs: either
tracing bar expecting more "FOO"s from the foo_list (that is reducing), or
to decide for the "baz" rule and fail when the next token is a "COMMA"
instead of a "COLON". Therefore ocamlyacc (and yacc also) complain, and
using the rule which performs the reduce step (bar) (AFAIK).
Thats what you result using a completed ocamlyacc example:
------------------------------------------------------------------
%token <string> FOO
%token <string> COLON
%token <string> COMMA
%token <string> CHAR
%start main
%type <string> main
%%
main: bar {$1}
| baz {$1}
;
bar: foo_list COLON xyzzy { $3 }
baz: FOO COLON yzzyx { $3 }
foo_list: FOO { [$1] }
| foo_list COMMA FOO { $3 :: $1 }
;
xyzzy: CHAR { $1 }
;
yzzyx: CHAR { $1 }
;
-------------------------------------------------------------
If you really want to distinguish between bar (single FOO) and baz
(multiple FOO), eg. to store a variable declaration/list, you must this do
explicitely by stating that foo_list contains more than one item:
foo_list: FOO COMMA FOO {$3::[$1]}
| FOO COMMA foo_list { $3 :: $1 }
;
If your grammar is different, you have to supply a completed example.
ciao
eckart
On Fri, 12 Sep 2003, Rafael 'Dido' Sevilla wrote:
> I have an ocamlyacc grammar that contains productions that look like:
>
> foo_list: FOO { [$1] }
> | foo_list COMMA FOO { $3 :: $1 }
> ;
>
> which creates a list of FOO objects. I however have some rules that
> need to be prefixed by either a single FOO or a foo_list, like so:
>
> bar: foo_list COLON xyzzy { ... }
>
> and
>
> baz: FOO COLON yzzyx { ... }
>
> This of course produces a shift/reduce conflict, and shifting fails to
> parse the 'bar' correctly. Perhaps I need to read a compiler
> construction textbook more thoroughly to figure out this answer, but any
> hints out there on getting rid of this shift/reduce.
>
> -------------------
> To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
> Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
> Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners
>
-----------------------------------------------------
Eckart Goehler
Sand 1
IAAT, Astronomy
72076 Tuebingen
Tel. : ++49-7071-297 54 73
Fax. : ++49-7071-29 34 58
e-mail : goehler@astro.uni-tuebingen.de
-----------------------------------------------------
-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners