Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.arch.embedded > #25819
| Path | csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail |
|---|---|
| From | Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> |
| Newsgroups | comp.arch.embedded |
| Subject | Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? |
| Date | Fri, 10 Feb 2017 17:41:32 -0600 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Lines | 61 |
| Message-ID | <o7liqq$ob1$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | <o79gce$om1$1@dont-email.me> <o7ab2k$fvs$1@gioia.aioe.org> <sT2mA.698994$vP3.351399@fx45.am4> <o7agp6$ijm$1@dont-email.me> <s55mA.728172$SV2.500573@fx39.am4> <o7ap5v$kuv$1@dont-email.me> <589902df$0$17334$c3e8da3$dd9697d2@news.astraweb.com> <o7bm3r$vb$2@dont-email.me> <dcsi9cl28b8fpt8jicig7asuc38d5l30bp@4ax.com> |
| Mime-Version | 1.0 |
| Content-Type | text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed |
| Content-Transfer-Encoding | 7bit |
| Injection-Date | Fri, 10 Feb 2017 23:36:58 -0000 (UTC) |
| Injection-Info | mx02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="e79b52b41dbd1a3991d777e86379a934"; logging-data="24929"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18BOhI/PwbwKsjGhUUWw2iQ+hx80zb5fCg=" |
| User-Agent | Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:49.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/49.0 SeaMonkey/2.46 |
| In-Reply-To | <dcsi9cl28b8fpt8jicig7asuc38d5l30bp@4ax.com> |
| Cancel-Lock | sha1:rMx66hGuOTq4jMC5m3nBzYyXCnQ= |
| Xref | csiph.com comp.arch.embedded:25819 |
Show key headers only | View raw
George Neuner wrote: > On Mon, 6 Feb 2017 23:36:01 -0600, Les Cargill > <lcargill99@comcast.com> wrote: > >> Clifford Heath wrote: >> >>> Lex is a language for describing a regular expression, >>> which it implements by turning it *into* an FSA. >>> >>> You don't need yacc to parse FP numbers. Such parsers >>> are for handling languages that require unbounded state, >>> not finite state. >> >> Just to be pedantic :), it's deterministic vs. non deterministic FA. >> Deterministic FA are equivalent to regular expressions. NFA >> are not, and very often, NFA are what we use for program control flow. > > Every NFA is equivalent to some DFA, and either can be mechanically > translated into the other. However the DFA version, in general, will > have many more states: in the (theoretical) worst case, equal to the > size of the power set of states in the NFA. > I've had perfectly good NFA deployed that I would hate to have to translate into a regexp :) As a practical matter ( and as you note ) , there is a very significant tactical difference. > But such explosive growth is very rare. In practice, the majority of > elements in the power set of NFA states will represent either unwanted > or redundant operations. > > >>> I'm also enthusiastic in using FSAs where appropriate, >>> but a lot of problems I face require unbounded state. >> >> This is where NFA shine - they're less formal than DFA. > > Not "less formal" per se if you are concerned about correctness. > However, in general, NFA are easier to specify and to understand. > That's the key. As you say - there may be a (small) price in the ability to demonstrate correctness. The principal advantage is the ability to generate nearly exhaustive test suites for them. It at least becomes a matter of exploiting combinators. > Any particular state of the equivalent DFA may be simultaneously > representing multiple states of the NFA. Consequently, the > transition/acceptance rules in the DFA may be extremely complex - > perhaps even incomprehensible to mere mortals. > > > George > -- Les Cargill
Back to comp.arch.embedded | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Do you use FSMs or HSMs? pozz <pozzugno@gmail.com> - 2017-02-06 10:43 +0100
Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-02-06 03:20 -0700
Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Dave Nadler <drn@nadler.com> - 2017-02-06 06:38 -0800
Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? "QL" <80499@EmbeddedRelated> - 2017-02-06 08:56 -0600
Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-02-06 12:13 -0700
Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? jim.brakefield@ieee.org - 2017-02-06 16:52 -0800
Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-02-06 18:11 -0700
Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-02-06 23:32 -0600
Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? pozz <pozzugno@gmail.com> - 2017-02-07 10:39 +0100
Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? John Speth <johnspeth@yahoo.com> - 2017-02-06 09:17 -0800
Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-02-06 18:03 +0000
Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-02-06 11:56 -0700
Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-02-06 20:34 +0000
Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-02-06 14:19 -0700
Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-02-06 22:12 +0000
Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-02-06 15:29 -0700
Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> - 2017-02-08 12:15 -0500
Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-02-08 23:52 +0000
Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> - 2017-02-08 19:59 -0500
Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Steve Watt <steve.removethis@Watt.COM> - 2017-02-17 00:30 +0000
Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-02-17 00:44 +0000
Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2017-02-07 10:12 +1100
Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-02-06 23:36 -0600
Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2017-02-07 03:15 -0500
Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-02-10 17:41 -0600
Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2017-02-07 19:56 +1100
Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-02-07 01:30 -0800
Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2017-02-07 20:42 +1100
Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-02-07 02:46 -0800
Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2017-02-08 00:27 +1100
Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-02-06 18:35 -0800
Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-02-06 21:50 -0700
Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-02-06 23:39 -0600
Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-02-06 23:20 -0800
Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-02-10 17:47 -0600
Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-02-10 16:11 -0800
Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-02-11 15:43 -0600
Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-02-06 23:24 -0600
csiph-web