Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.compilers > #2770
| From | gah4 <gah4@u.washington.edu> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.compilers |
| Subject | Re: Why are ambiguous grammars usually a bad idea? Why are languages usually defined and implemented with ambiguous grammars? |
| Date | 2021-12-27 19:45 -0800 |
| Organization | Compilers Central |
| Message-ID | <21-12-011@comp.compilers> (permalink) |
| References | <21-12-003@comp.compilers> <21-12-008@comp.compilers> |
(snip about conflicts in grammars) (then I wrote) > As far as I know, the main cause of ambiguous grammar in programming languages > is the nested if-then-optional-else structure. If you require else, then it isn't ambiguous, > but people like the optional else. That usually comes out as a shift-reduce conflict, > and parser generators know how to handle that. (snip) > But you already have the reply from John Levine ... > [See previous message, where we fixed that with "fi" in 1968. -John] I first learned if-then-else from PL/I, where it was designed in about 1963. I now suspect that people get used to the one they learned first, and find it more obvious. There is also some language, and I forget now which, with an ELIF construct, such that you can make a nested if-then-else sequence without the increase of nesting level, and so need only one ENDIF. IF e THEN s; ELIF e THEN s; ELIF e THEN s; ENDIF; (No comment on my preference for ENDIF vs. FI.) [That would also be Algol 68, using "fi" It didn't need the semicolons because they are separators, not terminators as in PL/I and C. If you've written scripts in the Bourne shell or its descendants such as bash and zsh, it deliberately looks a lot like Algol 68. A request from your moderator: if anyone is planning another round in the semicolon terminator vs. separator war, please don't. -John]
Back to comp.compilers | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: Why are ambiguous grammars usually a bad idea? Why are languages usually defined and implemented with ambiguous grammars? gah4 <gah4@u.washington.edu> - 2021-12-27 04:18 -0800 Re: Why are ambiguous grammars usually a bad idea? Why are languages usually defined and implemented with ambiguous grammars? gah4 <gah4@u.washington.edu> - 2021-12-27 19:45 -0800 Re: Why are ambiguous grammars usually a bad idea? Why are languages usually defined and implemented with ambiguous grammars? Christopher F Clark <christopher.f.clark@compiler-resources.com> - 2021-12-28 16:18 +0200
csiph-web