Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.compilers > #1715
| Path | csiph.com!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feeder01.blueworldhosting.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news.iecc.com!.POSTED.news.iecc.com!nerds-end |
|---|---|
| From | "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> |
| Newsgroups | comp.compilers |
| Subject | Re: precedences vs. hierarchy |
| Date | Tue, 7 Jun 2016 22:53:56 +0200 |
| Organization | Aioe.org NNTP Server |
| Lines | 25 |
| Sender | news@iecc.com |
| Approved | comp.compilers@iecc.com |
| Message-ID | <16-06-009@comp.compilers> (permalink) |
| References | <16-06-001@comp.compilers> <16-06-004@comp.compilers> <16-06-008@comp.compilers> |
| Mime-Version | 1.0 |
| Content-Type | text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed |
| Content-Transfer-Encoding | 8bit |
| Injection-Info | miucha.iecc.com; posting-host="news.iecc.com:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:676f:7373:6970"; logging-data="5675"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@iecc.com" |
| Keywords | parse |
| Posted-Date | 07 Jun 2016 17:19:37 EDT |
| X-submission-address | compilers@iecc.com |
| X-moderator-address | compilers-request@iecc.com |
| X-FAQ-and-archives | http://compilers.iecc.com |
| Xref | csiph.com comp.compilers:1715 |
Show key headers only | View raw
On 2016-06-07 17:35, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
>> (iii) By only precedence, which I prefer. Associativity is not needed if
>> operator precedence is split into the left and right ones. That allows
>> to express any associativity, unary operators included.
>
> What?
>
> You need the concept of associativity to tell whether
> A + B + C is (A + B) + C or A + (B + C).
No [explicit] associativity needed. You have left and right operator's
precedence instead. If you want
A + B + C |= (A + B) + C
you do +'s left precedence L and right precedence R > L. E.g. 1,2. If
you wanted A + (B + C). You would use 2,1.
The idea is that the ordering depends the operator's side.
--
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de
Back to comp.compilers | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
precedences vs. hierarchy Andreas Schramm <bassobajo@gmail.com> - 2016-06-06 09:08 +0200
Re: precedences vs. hierarchy "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> - 2016-06-06 17:08 +0200
Re: precedences vs. hierarchy Kaz Kylheku <545-066-4921@kylheku.com> - 2016-06-07 15:35 +0000
Re: precedences vs. hierarchy "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> - 2016-06-07 22:53 +0200
Re: precedences vs. hierarchy anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-06-08 09:48 +0000
Re: precedences vs. hierarchy George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2016-06-06 12:35 -0400
Re: precedences vs. hierarchy federation2005@netzero.com - 2016-06-06 14:01 -0700
Example: The Full Syntax Of Prolog (Re: precedences vs. hierarchy) rockbrentwood@gmail.com - 2016-08-24 15:45 -0700
csiph-web