Towards a Taxonomy for ECFG and RRPG Parsing

Hemerik, Kees

doi:10.1007/978-3-642-00982-2_35

Cited by 9 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…When regular expressions are applied to deterministic CF languages, the resulting language is in general non-deterministic. In parsing theory (see, e.g., [26]) special cases and sufficient conditions are known and used to check that the regular composition of LR(k) or LL(k) languages preserves the corresponding condition for determinism. For FG this is not necessary since any regular expression of precedence-consistent languages is precedence-consistent, therefore it is deterministic.…”

Section: Regular Languages With Prescribed Precedencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Operator precedence and the visibly pushdown property

Reghizzi

Mandrioli

2012

Journal of Computer and System Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Floyd's operator precedence grammars and languages (FG, FL) are a classical subclass of deterministic context-free (DCF) grammars and languages. We prove that several recently introduced language families motivated by the needs of model checking and of specifying XML-like languages are proper subsets of FL. The main cases considered include visibly pushdown languages (VPL) and balanced languages (BALAN), which are characterized by restricted precedence relations. FL have all the closure properties available for regular languages and generally viewed as necessary for application to model checking: reversal, prefixing and suffixing, concatenation, Kleene star, and boolean operations. All but the last results are new, and some require complex proofs, due to the necessary changes of syntax structure. Thus FL are the largest known subfamily of DCF having the same closure properties as VPL. FG, unlike VPL grammars, which are intended for abstract syntax modelling, are structurally adequate to specify real programming languages.

show abstract

Section: Regular Languages With Prescribed Precedencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Operator precedence and the visibly pushdown property

Reghizzi

Mandrioli

2012

Journal of Computer and System Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For brevity, whenever some passages are identical or immediately obtainable from classical ones, we do not spend much time to justify them. On the other hand, we include correctness proofs of the main constructions because past works on Extended BN F parsers have been found not rarely to be flawed [Hemerik 2009]. At the end of this section we briefly compare our method with older ones.…”

Section: Shift-reduce Parsingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Most papers usually start with critical reviews of related proposals, from which we can grasp the difficulties and motivations then perceived. The following discussion particularly draws from the later papers [Morimoto and Sassa 2001;Kannapinn 2001;Hemerik 2009].…”

Section: Related Work On Shift-reduce Parsing Of Ebnf Grammarsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…On the other hand, there have been numerous interesting but non-conclusive proposals for shift-reduce methods for EBNF grammars, which operate under more or less general assumptions and are implemented by various types of push-down parsers (more of that in Section 3.5). But a recent survey [Hemerik 2009] concludes rather negatively:…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…After half a century research on parsing, certain facts and properties that had to be formally proved in the early studies have become obvious, yet the endemic presence of errors or inaccuracies (listed in [Hemerik 2009]) in published constructions for EBNF grammars, warrants that all new constructions be proved correct. In the interest of readability and brevity, we first present the enabling properties and the constructions semi-formally also relying on significant examples; then, for the properties and constructions that are new, we provide correctness proofs in the appendix.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Parsing methods streamlined

Breveglieri,

Reghizzi,

Morzenti

2013

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper has the goals (1) of unifying top-down parsing with shift-reduce parsing to yield a single simple and consistent framework, and (2) of producing provably correct parsing methods, deterministic as well as tabular ones, for extended context-free grammars (EBNF ) represented as state-transition networks. Departing from the traditional way of presenting as independent algorithms the deterministic bottom-up LR (1), the top-down LL (1) and the general tabular (Earley) parsers, we unify them in a coherent minimalist framework. We present a simple general construction method for EBNF ELR (1) parsers, where the new category of convergence conflicts is added to the classical shift-reduce and reduce-reduce conflicts; we prove its correctness and show two implementations by deterministic push-down machines and by vector-stack machines, the latter to be also used for Earley parsers. Then the Beatty's theoretical characterization of LL (1) grammars is adapted to derive the extended ELL (1) parsing method, first by minimizing the ELR (1) parser and then by simplifying its state information. Through using the same notations in the ELR (1) case, the extended Earley parser is obtained. Since all the parsers operate on compatible representations, it is feasible to combine them into mixed mode algorithms.

show abstract