[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: POSIX and reduce/reduce conflicts
From: |
Paul Eggert |
Subject: |
Re: POSIX and reduce/reduce conflicts |
Date: |
Mon, 8 Apr 2002 15:21:19 -0700 (PDT) |
> From: Akim Demaille <address@hidden>
> Date: 08 Apr 2002 23:24:02 +0200
>
> Paul> Also, when there is a reduce/reduce conflict, yacc must reduce
> Paul> by the grammar rule that occurs earliest in the input.
>
> So using the highest priority is a POSIX violation.
I wasn't counting that as a conflict. Sorry, I should have made that
clear. My quotation above is rule 4 of how to apply precedences and
associativities. Rules (1) covers priorities, and has the expected
and traditional effect.
The standard also says:
"Conflicts resolved by precedence or associativity shall not be
counted in the shift/reduce and reduce/reduce conflicts reported by
yacc on either standard error or in the description file."
- Re: User Token Numbers, (continued)
- Re: User Token Numbers, Akim Demaille, 2002/04/08
- Re: User Token Numbers, Paul Eggert, 2002/04/08
- Re: User Token Numbers, Akim Demaille, 2002/04/09
- Re: User Token Numbers, Paul Eggert, 2002/04/09
- Re: User Token Numbers, Akim Demaille, 2002/04/10
- Re: User Token Numbers, Hans Aberg, 2002/04/10
- Re: User Token Numbers, Paul Eggert, 2002/04/10
Re: User Token Numbers, Florian Krohm, 2002/04/08
Re: POSIX and reduce/reduce conflicts, Paul Eggert, 2002/04/08
Re: POSIX and reduce/reduce conflicts, Hans Aberg, 2002/04/09