On 2005/03/02 17:07, Derek M Jones at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> I have some vague memory that somebody found (fairly late, in the 90'ies) a >> grammar transformation to make C becoming LALR(1) (modulo the usual context >> tweaks for "typedef", etc.) Then you would not need using the %glr option. >> You might check the newsgroup comp.compilers and its FAQ, published there >> monthly. > > I have a lalr(1) grammar for C (who doesn't?). The first edition > of Harbison&Steele list the output from such a tool for C.
There is nothing such in my Harbison&Steele (4th ed.). The comment I recall was that I think it was Paul Hilfinger who asked Bjarne Stroustrup (in cmop.compilers) why certain C++ ambiguities where in that language, and the latter replied it had to do with the fact that they had not a C LALR(1) grammar at the time the designed those C++ features. But my memory could be wrong. Hans Aberg _______________________________________________ Help-bison@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-bison
