[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Conflicts in large grammar
From: |
Laurence Finston |
Subject: |
Re: Conflicts in large grammar |
Date: |
Wed, 8 Aug 2007 14:20:12 +0200 (CEST) |
I've now determined that using a more recent version of Bison helps. I
was using 1.875. I added a rule that caused Bison to abort and then tried
it with 2.1, which succeeded. I ran both versions using input that didn't
cause 1.875 to fail and the number of shift/reduce conflicts differed.
I've now installed Bison 2.3 and it works. I will still try to get rid of
unnecessary rules, though. I'll also try to reduce or eliminate the s/r
conflicts, when I find the time.
It would be nice to know exactly what makes Bison abort. I suspect it has
to do with the states, but I wasn't able to understand why it would fail
in some cases and not in others.
Thanks again for the help.
Laurence
- Conflicts in large grammar, Laurence Finston, 2007/08/03
- Re: Conflicts in large grammar, Hans Aberg, 2007/08/04
- Re: Conflicts in large grammar, Laurence Finston, 2007/08/05
- Re: Conflicts in large grammar, Hans Aberg, 2007/08/05
- Re: Conflicts in large grammar, Laurence Finston, 2007/08/05
- Re: Conflicts in large grammar, henrik . sorensen, 2007/08/05
- Re: Conflicts in large grammar, lfinsto1, 2007/08/06
- Re: Conflicts in large grammar,
Laurence Finston <=
- Re: Conflicts in large grammar, Hans Aberg, 2007/08/08
- Re: Conflicts in large grammar, Laurence Finston, 2007/08/08
- Re: Conflicts in large grammar, Alfonso Urdaneta, 2007/08/08
- Re: Conflicts in large grammar, Hans Aberg, 2007/08/08
- Re: Conflicts in large grammar, Evan Lavelle, 2007/08/09
- Re: Conflicts in large grammar, Hans Aberg, 2007/08/09
- Re: Conflicts in large grammar, Evan Lavelle, 2007/08/09
- Re: Conflicts in large grammar, Alfonso Urdaneta, 2007/08/09