[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Why Bison prefer reduce to shift in dangling else?
From: |
Hans Aberg |
Subject: |
Re: Why Bison prefer reduce to shift in dangling else? |
Date: |
Tue, 25 Feb 2003 21:29:17 +0100 |
At 19:19 +0100 2003/02/25, Akim Demaille wrote:
>| I am swamped by the following dangling else problem. Bison prefers reduce to
>| shift for the following gramma. Any suggestions to resolve this problem will
>| be appreciated.
>
>If it does, that's a serious bug. I very much doubt it reduces here,
>check your files again, it certainly shifts.
Bison prefers shift over reduce (as in the Bison manual sec. 5.2). So this
is probably a misunderstanding: So just forgetting about it will give the
right parsing.
But it is better to use %nonassoc, as the grammr then becomes fully specified.
For some reason, the Bison manual, sec. 5.2, does not mention the %nonassoc
method. -- I think it should. It would be good if somebody added that, I
think. (Sorry, I can't do that right now.)
Hans Aberg
Re: Why Bison prefer reduce to shift in dangling else?, Akim Demaille, 2003/02/25
- Re: Why Bison prefer reduce to shift in dangling else?,
Hans Aberg <=
RE: Why Bison prefer reduce to shift in dangling else?, Lunjin Lu, 2003/02/25