[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Feature request
I will not have time to personally monitor the sablecc-list for the next few
weeks. I hope that meanwhile, more experienced users will generously help
new ones. Thanks in advance for it.
On Archie's suggestion: I may be wrong here, but my first intuition is that
achieving the requested functionality is far from a linear increase in the
parser table size. My intuition comes from the need of a completely new
collection of set of items for each "parser" (He is suggesting one new
parser/production). If somebody can contradict me here, I'll be glad to hear
[Here's some thoughts behind my assumptions]
An item set can be represented by its kernel, which contains no item of the
p -> . x y z (except start -> . x y z EOF)
But implementing Archie's idea requires a new start item set with kernel:
p -> . x y z (possibly augmented with a trailing EOF).
Obviously, this item did not exist in the original collection of set of