Re: Precedence declarations applied to rules

[Hans Aberg]

At 02:26 +0200 2003/05/20, Frank Heckenbach wrote:
>> A more serious problem is that I do no see the exact relation to the other
>> method of resolving shift/reduce conflicts by using precedence of tokens.
>> These two methods, precedence for rules and precedence for tokens, have an
>> overlap, but properly one would want to see whether the latter method is a
>> proper subset of the former one or not.
>
>I suppose it is, but perhaps not in the natural way, i.e. you might
>have to reformulate the grammar slightly to use the new mechanism in
>some cases (but I'm not sure).

Perhaps you are right, with the new system, one would have to rewrite the
grammars, and in the process making sure that the grammar is correct. The
spinoff is a grammar that does not depend on the parsing algorithm, if
properly implemented.

The theoretical problem remains though.

  Hans Aberg