Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c > #162646
| Subject | Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
| References | <sh2vvh$oir$1@dont-email.me> <precedence-20210905232846@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de> <87y28ajz4o.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <sh4k4k$cd5$1@dont-email.me> <87k0jujatb.fsf@bsb.me.uk> |
| From | Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> |
| Message-ID | <FipZI.27314$jm6.6718@fx07.iad> (permalink) |
| Organization | Forte - www.forteinc.com |
| Date | 2021-09-06 10:09 -0400 |
On 9/6/21 5:46 AM, Ben Bacarisse wrote: > It was trendy to have asymmetric precedence at one time (exponentiation > was the most common example, I think), but that seems to have been > dropped in later manuals. When "Operator precedence" isn't described in terms of actual operator precedence, but a grammar production rule, it is easy to create the asymmetric cases. I wonder if the issue is that more modern systems go to a less grammar and more descriptive way to describe expressions, which makes this sort of asymmetry harder to describe and thus undesirable. It may also be related to how we write parsers, a grammar based parser will tend to be bigger, as you need separate code (at least somewhat) for each level of the grammar, while a precedence based parser while somewhat more complicated that a single grammar rule, is smaller as the repetition of rules becomes a table of operators and precedence.
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators James Harris <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2021-09-05 18:49 +0100
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2021-09-05 13:11 -0700
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-09-05 21:12 +0100
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-06 09:09 +0200
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2021-09-05 20:19 +0000
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-09-05 17:52 -0400
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-09-06 00:09 +0100
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-06 09:15 +0200
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-09-06 11:10 +0100
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-06 13:01 +0200
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2021-09-06 04:20 -0700
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> - 2021-09-07 09:27 -0500
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-09-08 00:20 +0100
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> - 2021-09-08 14:18 -0500
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-09-06 02:01 +0100
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators James Harris <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2021-09-06 09:39 +0100
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-09-06 10:46 +0100
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-09-06 10:09 -0400
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-09-06 16:05 +0100
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators James Harris <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2021-09-06 09:27 +0100
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators James Harris <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2021-09-06 12:18 +0100
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-06 13:44 +0200
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators James Harris <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2021-09-06 13:38 +0100
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-06 18:12 +0200
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators tth <tth@none.invalid> - 2021-09-06 18:20 +0200
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-06 23:40 +0200
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-09-06 17:20 -0700
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-09-06 13:44 +0100
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-09-06 17:23 -0700
Re: C precedence - relative comparisons before equality operators James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-09-06 23:07 -0400
csiph-web