Incremental recursive descent parsing

Murching, Arvid M.; Prasad, Yedu; Srikant, Y. N.

doi:10.1016/0096-0551(90)90020-p

Cited by 13 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Research on incremental parsing has focused on LR parsing [Ghezzi and Mandrioli 1980;Wagner and Graham 1998;Jalili and Gallier 1982;Larcheveque 1995;Petrone 1995] and LL (recursive descent parsing) [Murching et al 1990;Li 1995;Linden 1993], since programming languages are typically described by LR(0), LR(1), LL(1), LALR(1), and LL(1) grammars. All techniques start by parsing the input text and producing a parse tree, which is typically annotated with auxiliary information.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Incremental validation of XML documents

Balmin

Papakonstantinou

Vianu

2004

ACM Trans. Database Syst.

110

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We investigate the incremental validation of XML documents with respect to DTDs, specialized DTDs, and XML Schemas, under updates consisting of element tag renamings, insertions, and deletions. DTDs are modeled as extended context-free grammars. "Specialized DTDs" allow the decoupling of element types from element tags. XML Schemas are abstracted as specialized DTDs with limitations on the type assignment. For DTDs and XML Schemas, we exhibit an O(m log n) incremental validation algorithm using an auxiliary structure of size O(n), where n is the size of the document and m the number of updates. The algorithm does not handle the incremental validation of XML Schema wrt renaming of internal nodes, which is handled by the specialized DTDs incremental validation algorithm. For specialized DTDs, we provide an O(m log 2 n) incremental algorithm, again using an auxiliary structure of size O(n). This is a significant improvement over brute-force re-validation from scratch.We exhibit a restricted class of DTDs called local that arise commonly in practice and for which incremental validation can be done in practically constant time by maintaining only a list of counters. We present implementations of both general incremental validation and local validation on an XML database built on top of a relational database.Our experimentation includes a study of the applicability of local validation in practice, results on the calibration of parameters of the auxiliary data structure, and results on the performance comparison between the general incremental validation technique, the local validation technique, and brute-force validation from scratch.

show abstract

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Incremental validation of XML documents

Balmin

Papakonstantinou

Vianu

2004

ACM Trans. Database Syst.

110

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Incremental parsers attempt to minimize the reparsing process when a change from an input string xyz to zy~z is made. A number of algorithms have been proposed for LR incremental parsers, but few have been proposed for LL incremental parsers [1,2]. Both of the LL-based algorithms in these papers attempt to minimize the reparsing on the original parse tree and the parse table.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Building efficient incremental LL parser by augmenting LL table and threading parse tree

1995

Proceedings of the 33rd Annual on Southeast Regional Conference - ACM-SE 33

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…There have been suggested many methods for incremental analysis. Algorithms of incremental compilation of context-free language class LL (Yang, 1993;Li, 1995;Li, 1996;Shilling, 1992;Murching, Prasad and Srikant, 1990;Ferro and Dion, 1994) and LR (Yang, 1994;Agrawal and Detrich, 1983;Tomita, 1987;Horspool, 1990;Wagner and Graham, 1997;Wagner and Graham, 1998;Wagner, 1998) have been published. Melichar and Vagner (2008) published an elementary text about how to create an incremental parser of LL(1) languages as a part of educational materials in English, based on previous publications of Li (1995), but suitably accompanied by examples and illustrations.…”

Section: Overview Of Literature and The Present Statementioning

confidence: 99%