CS308 Compiler Principles Syntax Analyzer Li Jiang

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "CS308 Compiler Principles Syntax Analyzer Li Jiang"

Transcription

1 CS308 Syntax Analyzer Li Jiang Department of Computer Science and Engineering Shanghai Jiao Tong University

2 Syntax Analyzer Syntax Analyzer creates the syntactic structure of the given source program. This syntactic structure is mostly a parse tree. Syntax Analyzer is also known as parser. The syntax of a program is described by a context-free grammar (CFG). We will use BNF (Backus-Naur Form) notation in the description of CFGs. The syntax analyzer (parser) checks whether a given source program satisfies the rules implied by a context-free grammar or not. If it satisfies, the parser creates the parse tree of that program. Otherwise the parser gives the error messages. A context-free grammar gives a precise syntactic specification of a programming language. the design of the grammar is an initial phase of the design of a compiler. a grammar can be directly converted into a parser by some tools. 2

3 Parser / Syntax Analyzer Parser works on a stream of tokens. The smallest item is a token. source program Lexical Analyzer token get next token Parser parse tree The parser obtains a string of tokens from the lexical analyzer, and verifies that the string of token names can be generated by the grammar for the source language. 3

4 Parsers Cont d We categorize the parsers into two groups: 1. Top-Down Parser the parse tree is created top to bottom, starting from the root. 2. Bottom-Up Parser the parse is created bottom to top; starting from the leaves Both scan the input from left to right (one symbol at a time). Efficient top-down and bottom-up parsers can be implemented only for sub-classes of context-free grammars. LL for top-down parsing LR for bottom-up parsing 4

5 Outline Context Free Grammar Parse Tree Top-down Parser Bottom-up Parser 5

6 Context-Free Grammars Recursive structures of a programming language are defined by a context-free grammar. A context-free grammar consists of: A finite set of terminals (in our case, these will be the set of tokens) A finite set of non-terminals (syntactic-variables) A finite set of production rules in the following form A where A is a non-terminal and is a string of terminals and non-terminals (including the empty string) A start symbol (one of the non-terminal symbol) Example: E E + E E E E * E E / E - E E ( E ) E id 6

7 Derivations E E+E E derives E+E (E+E derives from E) we can replace E by E+E we have to have a production rule E E+E in our grammar. E E+E id+e id+id A sequence of replacements of non-terminal symbols is called a derivation of id+id from E. In general a derivation step is A if there is a production rule A in our grammar where and are arbitrary strings of terminal and non-terminal symbols n ( n derives from 1 or 1 derives n ) * + : derives in one step : derives in zero or more steps : derives in one or more steps 7

8 CFG - Terminology L(G) is the language of grammar G (the language generated by G). It is a set of sentences. A sentence of L(G) is a string of terminal symbols of G. If S is the start symbol of G then is a sentence of L(G) iff S *, where is a string of terminals of G. If G is a context-free grammar, L(G) is a context-free language. Two grammars are equivalent if they produce the same language. * S - If contains non-terminals, it is called as a sentential form of G. - If does not contain non-terminals, it is called as a sentence of G. 8

9 Derivation Example E -E -(E) -(E+E) -(id+e) -(id+id) OR E -E -(E) -(E+E) -(E+id) -(id+id) At each derivation step, we can choose any of the non-terminal in the sentential form of G for the replacement. If we always choose the left-most non-terminal in each derivation step, this derivation is called as left-most derivation. If we always choose the right-most non-terminal in each derivation step, this derivation is called as right-most derivation. 9

10 Left-Most and Right-Most Derivations Left-Most Derivation E -E -(E) -(E+E) -(id+e) -(id+id) lm Right-Most Derivation E -E -(E) -(E+E) -(E+id) -(id+id) rm lm rm lm rm The top-down parsers try to find the left-most derivation of the given source program. The bottom-up parsers try to find the right-most derivation of the given source program in the reverse order. lm rm lm rm 10

11 Quiz The set of all strings of 0s and 1s that are palindrome; that is, the string reads the same backward as forward. The set of all strings of 0s and 1s with an equal number of 0s and 1s. 11

12 Outline Context Free Grammar Parse Tree Top-down Parser Bottom-up Parser 12

13 Parse Tree A parse tree is a graphical representation of a derivation. Inner nodes of a parse tree are non-terminal symbols. The leaves of a parse tree are terminal symbols. E E E -E -(E) - E - E -(E+E) ( E ) E E - E - E -(id+e) -(id+id) ( E ) ( E ) E + E E + E id id id - E ( E E ) E + E 13

14 Ambiguity A grammar produces more than one parse tree for a sentence is an ambiguous grammar. E E+E id+e id+e*e id+id*e id+id*id E E + id E id E * E id E E*E E+E*E id+e*e id+id*e id+id*id E E + id E * E E id id 14

15 Ambiguity Cont d For the most parsers, the grammar must be unambiguous. unambiguous grammar unique selection of the parse tree for a sentence We should eliminate the ambiguity in the grammar during the design phase of the compiler. An ambiguous grammar should be rewritten to eliminate the ambiguity. How? We have to prefer one of the parse trees of a sentence (generated by an ambiguous grammar) to disambiguate that grammar to restrict to this choice. 15

16 Ambiguity Elimination Cont d Ambiguous grammars (because of ambiguous operators) can be disambiguated according to the precedence and associativity rules. E E+E E*E E^E id (E) disambiguate the grammar precedence: E E+T T T T*F F F G^F G G id (E) ^ (right to left) * (left to right) + (left to right) 16

17 Ambiguity Cont d stmt if expr then stmt if expr then stmt else stmt otherstmts if E 1 then if E 2 then S 1 else S 2 stmt if expr then stmt else stmt if expr stmt then stmt E 1 if expr then stmt S 2 E 1 if expr then stmt else stmt E 2 S 1 E 2 S 1 S

18 Ambiguity Elimination Cont d We prefer the parse tree, in which else matches with the closest if. So, we can disambiguate our grammar to reflect this choice. The unambiguous grammar will be: stmt matchedstmt unmatchedstmt matchedstmt if expr then matchedstmt else matchedstmt otherstmts unmatchedstmt if expr then stmt if expr then matchedstmt else unmatchedstmt Try again! if E 1 then if E 2 then S 1 else S 2 18

19 Left Recursion A grammar is left recursive if it has a nonterminal A such that there is a derivation. + A A for some string Top-down parsing techniques cannot handle leftrecursive grammars. So, we have to convert our left-recursive grammar into an equivalent grammar which is not leftrecursive. The left-recursion may appear in a single step of the derivation (immediate left-recursion), or may appear in more than one step of the derivation. 19

20 Immediate Left-Recursion Elimination A A where does not start with A eliminate immediate left recursion A A A A an equivalent grammar In general: A A 1... A m 1... n where 1... n do not start with A eliminate immediate left recursion A 1 A... n A A 1 A... m A an equivalent grammar 20

21 Immediate Left-Recursion Elimination Example E E+T T T T*F F F id (E) eliminate immediate left recursion E T E E +T E T F T T *F T F id (E) 21

22 Non-Immediate Left-Recursion Just eliminating the immediate left-recursion is not enough to get a left-recursion free grammar. S Aa b A Sc d This grammar is still left-recursive. S Aa Sca A Sc Aac or causes to a left-recursion We have to eliminate all left-recursions from our grammar The Left-recursion is hidden! 22

23 Algorithm for Eliminating Left-Recursion - Arrange non-terminals in some order: A 1... A n - for i from 1 to n do { - for j from 1 to i-1 do { } replace each production A i A j by A i 1... k where A j 1... k Expose the hidden leftrecursion! } - eliminate immediate left-recursions among A i productions * 23

24 Example for Eliminating Left-Recursion S Aa b A Ac Sd f - Order of non-terminals: S, A for S: - we do not enter the inner loop. - there is no immediate left recursion in S. for A: - Replace A Sd with A Aad bd So, we will have A Ac Aad bd f - Eliminate the immediate left-recursion in A A bda fa A ca ada What about another order? So, the resulting equivalent grammar which is not left-recursive is: S Aa b A bda fa A ca ada 24

25 Example for Eliminating Left-Recursion Cont d S Aa b A Ac Sd f - Order of non-terminals: A, S for A: - Eliminate the immediate left-recursion in A A SdA fa A ca for S: - Replace S Aa with S SdA a fa a So, we will have S SdA a fa a b - Eliminate the immediate left-recursion in S S fa as bs S da as So, the resulting equivalent grammar which is not left-recursive is: S fa as bs S da as A SdA fa A ca See the difference? 25

26 Left-Factoring A predictive parser (a top-down parser without backtracking) needs the grammar to be leftfactored. grammar a new equivalent grammar suitable for predictive parsing stmt if expr then stmt else stmt if expr then stmt when we see if, we cannot know which production rule to choose to re-write stmt in the derivation. 26

27 In general, Left-Factoring Cont d A 1 2 where is non-empty and the first symbols of 1 and 2 (if they have one) are different. when processing we cannot know whether expand A to 1 or A to 2 But, if we re-write the grammar as follows A A A 1 2 so, we can immediately expand A to A 27

28 Algorithm for Left-Factoring For each non-terminal A with two or more alternatives (production rules) with a common non-empty prefix, say A 1... n 1... m where is the longest prefix convert it into A A 1... m A 1... n 28

29 Left-Factoring Example1 A abb ab cdg cdeb cdfb A aa cdg cdeb cdfb A bb B A aa cda A bb B A g eb fb 29

30 Left-Factoring Example2 A ad a ab abc b A aa b A d b bc A aa b A d ba A c 30

31 CFG vs. Regular Expression Grammar is a more powerful notation than regular expressions. Every language described by a regular expression can be described by a grammar. For each state i of the FA, create a nonterminal A i. If state i has a transition to state j on input a (include ε), add the production A i aa j. If i is an accepting state, add A i ε. If i is the start state, make A i be the start symbol of the grammar. A 0 ba 0 aa 1 A 1 aa 1 ba 2 (a b) * a b A 2 aa 1 ba 0 A 2 ε 31

32 CFG Vs. Regular Expression Cont d A language described by a grammar may not be described by a regular expression. Because regular expression/finite automata cannot count. Example: Language L = {a n b n n >= 1} Can be written as grammar S asb ab But cannot be expressed by a regular expression 32

33 Quiz Given the following grammar, a) left factor it; b) see whether suitable for top-down parsing? c) Eliminate left recursion from the original grammar; d) Is the resulting grammar suitable for top-down parsing S -> 0S1 01 S -> SS+ SS* a S -> S(S)S e S -> (L) a, L -> L, S S 33

34 S -> SS+ SS* a 1. Left factor 2. No. Left recursion 3. Eliminate left recursion 4. Yes 35

35 CS308 Top-Down Parsing

36 Top-Down Parsing The parse tree is created top to bottom. Top-down parser Recursive-Descent Parsing Backtracking is needed (If a choice of a production rule does not work, we backtrack to try other alternatives.) It is a general parsing technique, but not widely used. Not efficient Predictive Parsing No backtracking Efficient Recursive Predictive Parsing is a special form of Recursive Descent parsing without backtracking. Non-Recursive (Table Driven) Predictive Parser is also known as LL(1) parser. 40

37 Recursive-Descent Parsing A recursive-descent parsing program consists of a set of procedures, one for each nonterminal. Backtracking is needed (need repeated scans over the input). It tries to find the left-most derivation. S abc B bc b input: abc S Main(){ } Execution begins with the procedure for the start symbol, which halts and announces success if its procedure body scans the entire input string. a B c a B c fails, backtrack S b c b 41

38 Procedure for stmt compares its argument with the lookahead symbol advances to the next input terminal if they match, and changes the value of lookahead, each terminal is matched with each nonterminal leads to a call of its procedure A left-recursive grammar can cause a recursivedescent parser to go into an infinite loop. How can we get this procedure? Let s continue 42

39 Predictive Parser a grammar a grammar suitable for predictive eliminating left parsing (a LL(1) grammar) left recursion factoring not 100% guaranteed When rewriting a non-terminal in a derivation step, a predictive parser can uniquely choose a production rule by just looking the current symbol in the input string. A 1... n input:... a... current token 43

40 Predictive Parser Example stmt if... while... begin... for... When we are trying to rewrite the nonterminal stmt, we can uniquely choose the production rule by just looking the current token. if the current token is if we have to choose first production rule. 44

41 Recursive Predictive Parsing Each non-terminal corresponds to a procedure. Example: A abb (Only production rule for A) proc A { - match the current token with a, and move to the next token; - call proc B; - match the current token with b, and move to the next token; } 45

42 Recursive Predictive Parsing Cont d A abb bab proc A { case of the current token { a : - match the current token with a, and move to the next token; - call B; - match the current token with b, and move to the next token; b : - match the current token with b, and move to the next token; - call A; - call B; } } 46

43 Recursive Predictive Parsing Cont d When to apply -productions. A aa bb If all other productions fail, we should apply an -production. For example, if the current token is not a or b, we may apply the -production. Most correct choice: We should apply an -production for a nonterminal A when the current token is in the follow set of A (which terminals can follow A in the sentential forms). 47

44 Recursive Predictive Parsing Example A abe cbd C B bb C f proc A { proc C { match the current token with f, case of the current token { and move to the next token; } a: - match the current token with a, and move to the next token; proc B { - call B; case of the current token { - match the current token with e, b: - match the current token with b, and move to the next token; and move to the next token; c: - match the current token with c, - call B and move to the next token; d, e: do nothing - call B; } - match the current token with d, } and move to the next token; follow set of B f: - call C } } first set of C 48

45 Compute FIRST & FOLLOW X > FIRST FIRST & FOLLOW set for tokens! 49

46 Non-Recursive Predictive Parsing Non-Recursive predictive parsing is a table-driven parsing method. It is a top-down parser. It is also known as LL(1) Parser. LL(1) one input symbol used as a look-ahead symbol to determine parser action left most derivation input scanned from left to right input buffer stack Non-recursive Predictive Parser output Parsing Table We need an algorithm to implement the aforementioned procedures. What is a proper data structure? 50

47 LL(1) Parser input buffer string of tokens to be parsed, followed by endmarker $. output a production rule representing a step of the derivation sequence (left-most derivation) of the string in the input buffer. stack contains the grammar symbols at the bottom of the stack, there is a special endmarker $. initially the stack contains only the symbol $ and the starting symbol S. $S when the stack is emptied (i.e., only $ left in the stack), the parsing is completed. parsing table a two-dimensional array M[A,a] each row is a non-terminal symbol each column is a terminal symbol or the special symbol $ each entry holds a production rule. 51

48 LL(1) Parser Parser Actions The symbol at the top of the stack (say X) and the current symbol in the input string (say a) determine the parser action. There are four possible parser actions. 1. If X and a are $ parser halts (successful completion) 2. If X and a are the same terminal symbol (different from $) parser pops X from the stack, and moves to the next symbol in the input buffer. 3. If X is a non-terminal parser looks at the parsing table entry M[X,a]. If M[X,a] holds a production rule X Y 1 Y 2...Y k, it pops X from the stack and pushes Y k,y k-1,...,y 1 into the stack. 4. none of the above error all empty entries in the parsing table are errors. If X is a terminal symbol different from a, this is also an error case. 52

49 LL(1) Parser Example1 E TE E +TE T FT T *FT F (E) id id + * ( ) $ E E TE E TE E E +TE E E T T FT T FT T T T *FT T T F F id F (E) 53

50 LL(1) Parser Example1 Cont d stack input output $E id+id$ E TE $E T id+id$ T FT $E T F id+id$ F id $ E T id id+id$ $ E T +id$ T $ E +id$ E +TE $ E T+ +id$ $ E T id$ T FT $ E T F id$ F id $ E T id id$ $ E T $ T $ E $ E $ $ accept 54

51 LL(1) Parser Example2 S aba B bb S LL(1) Parsing Table S aba a b $ B B B bb stack input output $S abba$ S aba $aba abba$ $ab bba$ B bb $abb bba$ $ab ba$ B bb $abb ba$ $ab a$ B $a a$ $ $ accept, successful completion 55

52 LL(1) Parser Example2 Cont d Outputs: S aba B bb B bb B Derivation(left-most): S aba abba abbba abba Parse tree S a B a Remaining question? b B How derive parsing table? b B 56

53 Constructing LL(1) Parsing Tables Two functions are used in the construction of LL(1) parsing tables. FIRST( ) is a set of the terminal symbols which occur as first symbols in strings derived from is any string of grammar symbols. if derives to, then is also in FIRST( ). FOLLOW(A) is the set of the terminals which occur immediately after (follow) the non-terminal A in the strings derived from the starting symbol. a terminal a is in FOLLOW(A) if S * Aa endmarker $ is in FOLLOW(A) if S * A 57

54 Computing FIRST(X) If X is a terminal symbol FIRST(X)={X} If X is a non-terminal symbol and X is a production rule is in FIRST(X) If X is a non-terminal symbol and X Y 1 Y 2..Y n is a production rule if terminal a in FIRST(Y i ) and is in all FIRST(Y j ) for j=1,...,i-1, then a is in FIRST(X). if is in all FIRST(Y j ) for j=1,...,n, then is in FIRST(X). If X is FIRST(X)={ } We apply these rules until nothing more can be added to any FIRST set. 58

55 FIRST Example * E TE E +TE T FT T *FT F (E) id FIRST(F) = { (, id } FIRST(TE ) = { (, id } FIRST(T ) = { *, } FIRST(+TE ) = {+} FIRST(T) = { (, id } FIRST( ) = { } FIRST(E ) = { +, } FIRST(FT ) = { (, id } FIRST(E) = { (, id } FIRST(*FT ) = {*} FIRST( ) = { } FIRST((E)) = {(} FIRST(id) = {id} 59

56 Computing FOLLOW(X) If S is the start symbol $ is in FOLLOW(S) if A B is a production rule everything in FIRST( ) is in FOLLOW(B) except If ( A B is a production rule ) or ( A B is a production rule and is in FIRST( ) ) everything in FOLLOW(A) is in FOLLOW(B). We apply these rules until nothing more can be added to any FOLLOW set. 60

57 FOLLOW Example * E TE E +TE T FT T *FT F (E) id FOLLOW(E) = { $, ) } FOLLOW(E ) = { $, ) } FOLLOW(T) = { +, ), $ } FIRST(E ) = {+, } FOLLOW(T ) = { +, ), $ } FOLLOW(F) = { +, *, ), $ } FIRST(T ) = {*, } 61

58 Constructing LL(1) Parsing Table For each production A of grammar G for each terminal a in FIRST( ) add A to M[A,a] If in FIRST( ) for each terminal a in FOLLOW(A), add A to M[A,a] If in FIRST( ) and $ in FOLLOW(A) add A to M[A,$] All other undefined entries of the parsing table are error entries. 62

59 Constructing LL(1) Parsing Table Example E TE FIRST(TE )={(,id} E TE into M[E,(] and M[E,id] E +TE FIRST(+TE )={+} E +TE into M[E,+] E FIRST( )={ } none but since in FIRST( ) and FOLLOW(E )={$,)} E into M[E,$] and M[E,)] T FT FIRST(FT )={(,id} T FT into M[T,(] and M[T,id] T *FT FIRST(*FT )={*} T *FT into M[T,*] T FIRST( )={ } none but since in FIRST( ) and FOLLOW(T )={$,),+} T into M[T,$], M[T,)] and M[T,+] F (E) FIRST((E))={(} F (E) into M[F,(] F id FIRST(id)={id} F id into M[F,id] 63

60 LL(1) Grammars A grammar whose parsing table has no multiply defined entries is said to be LL(1) grammar. An entry in the parsing table of a grammar may contain more than one production rule. In this case, we say that it is not a LL(1) grammar. a grammar a LL(1) grammar (no 100% guarantee) eliminating left recursion left factoring 64

61 A Grammar which is not LL(1) S i C t S E a FOLLOW(S) = { $,e } E e S FOLLOW(E) = { $,e } C b FOLLOW(C) = { t } FIRST(iCtSE) = {i} FIRST(a) = {a} FIRST(eS) = {e} FIRST( ) = { } FIRST(b) = {b} S S a E a b e i t $ E e S E S ictse E Problem: ambiguity C C b two production rules for M[E,e] 65

62 A Grammar which is not LL(1) Cont d What can we do if the resulting parsing table contains multiply defined entries? eliminate the left recursion. left factor the grammar. If the parsing table still contains multiply defined entries, that grammar is ambiguous or it is inherently not a LL(1) grammar. A left recursive grammar cannot be a LL(1) grammar. A A any terminal that appears in FIRST( ) also appears FIRST(A ) because A. If is, any terminal that appears in FIRST( ) also appears in FIRST(A ) and FOLLOW(A). A not left factored grammar cannot be a LL(1) grammar A 1 2 any terminal that appears in FIRST( 1 ) also appears in FIRST( 2 ). An ambiguous grammar cannot be a LL(1) grammar. 66

63 Properties of LL(1) Grammars A grammar G is LL(1) if and only if the following conditions hold for any two distinctive production rules A and A 1. and do not derive any string starting with the same terminals. 2. At most one of and can derive. 3. If can derive, then cannot derive to any string starting with a terminal in FOLLOW(A). 67

64 Quiz For grammar: S -> S+S SS (S) S* a, devise predictive parsers and show the parsing tables. You may left-factor and/or eliminate left-recursion from your gramars. 68

65 S -> S+S SS (S) S* a Left-factoring Eliminate left-recursion 69

66 S -> S+S SS (S) S* a Revised production FIRST && FOLLOW 70

67 S -> S+S SS (S) S* a Parsing table 71

68 CS308 Bottom-Up Parsing

69 Bottom-Up Parsing A bottom-up parser creates the parse tree of the given input starting from leaves towards the root. A bottom-up parser tries to find the right-most derivation of the given input in the reverse order. S... Bottom-up parsing is also known as shift-reduce parsing because its two main actions are shift and reduce. At each shift action, the current symbol in the input string is pushed into a stack. At each reduction step, the symbols at the top of the stack (this symbol sequence is the right side of a production) will be replaced by the non-terminal at the left side of that production. 79

70 Shift-Reduce Parsing A shift-reduce parser tries to reduce the given input string into the starting symbol. a string the starting symbol reduced to At each reduction step, a substring of the input matching to the right side of a production rule is replaced by the non-terminal at the left side of that production rule. If the substring is chosen correctly, the right most derivation of that string is created in the reverse order. Rightmost Derivation: Shift-Reduce Parser finds: S * rm S... rm rm 80

71 Shift-Reduce Parsing -- Example S aabb input string: aaabb A aa a aaabb B bb b aabb reduction aabb S S aabb aabb aaabb aaabb rm rm rm rm Right Sentential Forms How do we know which substring to be replaced at each reduction step? 81

72 Handle In the following reduction, a handle of is the body of production A in the position following. S * A rm ( is a string of terminals) A handle is a substring that matches the right side of a production rule. But not every substring matches the right side of a production rule is a handle Only that can move the reduction forward towards the start symbol in the reverse of a rightmost derivation. If the grammar is unambiguous, then every rightsentential form of the grammar has exactly one handle. rm 82

73 S ab ba A a as baa B abb bs b Handle Example What is the handle of aabbab? S ab aabb aabb aabsb aabbab Handle is ba 83

74 Handle Pruning A right-most derivation in reverse can be obtained by handle-pruning. S= n-1 n = rm string rm rm rm rm input From n, find a handle A n n in n, and replace n by A n to get n-1. Then find a handle A n-1 n-1 in n-1, and replace n-1 by A n-1 to get n-2. Repeat this, until we reach S. 84

75 Handle Pruning Example E E+T T T T*F F F (E) id Right-Most Derivation of id+id*id E E+T E+T*F E+T*id E+F*id E+id*id T+id*id F+id*id id+id*id Right Sentential Form id+id*id F+id*id T+id*id E+id*id E+F*id E+T*id E+T*F E+T E Reducing Production F id T F E T F id T F F id T T*F E E+T Handles are red and underlined in the right-sentential forms. 85

76 Shift-Reduce Parsing Initial stack just contains only the end-marker $. The end of the input string is marked by the end-marker $. There are four possible actions in a shift-reduce parser: Shift: The next input symbol is shifted into the top of the stack. Reduce: Replace the handle on the top of the stack by the non-terminal. Accept: Successful completion of parsing. Error: Parser discovers a syntax error, and calls an error recovery routine. 86

77 Shift-Reduce Parsing Example Stack Input Action E E+T T $ id+id*id$ shift T T*F F $id +id*id$ reduce by F id F (E) id $F +id*id$ reduce by T F $T +id*id$ reduce by E T E 8 $E +id*id$ shift $E+ id*id$ shift E 3 + T 7 $E+id *id$ reduce by F id $E+F *id$ reduce by T F T 2 T 5 * F6 $E+T *id$ shift $E+T* id$ shift F 1 F 4 id $E+T*id $ reduce by F id $E+T*F $ reduce by T T*F id id $E+T $ reduce by E E+T Parse Tree $E $ accept 87

78 Try it by your own Grammar: S -> SS+ SS* a Right-sentential forms: aaa*a++ Give bottom-up parses 88

79 Conflicts During Shift-Reduce Parsing There are context-free grammars for which shift-reduce parsers cannot be used. Stack contents and the next input symbol may not decide action: shift/reduce conflict: Whether make a shift operation or a reduction. reduce/reduce conflict: The parser cannot decide which of several reductions to make. If a shift-reduce parser cannot be used for a grammar, that grammar is called as non- LR(k) grammar. An ambiguous grammar can never be a LR grammar. 89

80 Shift-Reduce Parsers There are two main categories of shift-reduce parsers 1. Operator-Precedence Parser simple, but only a small class of grammars. CFG LR LALR SLR 2. LR-Parsers covers wide range of grammars. SLR simple LR parser LR most general LR parser LALR intermediate LR parser (lookahead LR parser) SLR, LR and LALR work same, only their parsing tables are different. 90

81 LR Parsers The most powerful shift-reduce parsing (yet efficient) is: LR(k) parsing. left to right right-most k lookahead scanning derivation (k is omitted it is 1) LR parsing s advantages: LR parsing is the most general non-backtracking shift-reduce parsing, yet it is still efficient. The class of grammars that can be parsed using LR methods is a proper superset of the class of grammars that can be parsed with predictive parsers. LL(1)-Grammars LR(1)-Grammars An LR-parser can detect a syntactic error in a left-to-right scan of the input. 91

82 Model of LR Parser * state symbol stack S m X m S m-1 input a 1... a i... a n $ LR Parsing Algorithm output X m-1.. Action Table Goto Table S 1 X 1 S 0 s t a t e s terminals and $ four different actions s t a t e s non-terminal each item is a state number 92

83 A Configuration of LR Parsing Algorithm A configuration of a LR parsing is: ( S o X 1 S 1... X m S m, a i a i+1... a n $ ) Stack Rest of Input S m and a i decides the parser action by consulting the parsing action table. (Initial Stack contains just S o ) A configuration of a LR parsing represents the right sentential form: X 1... X m a i a i+1... a n $ 93

84 Actions of A LR-Parser 1. shift s -- shifts the next input symbol and the state s into the stack ( S o X 1 S 1... X m S m, a i a i+1... a n $ ) ( S o X 1 S 1... X m S m a i s, a i+1... a n $ ) 2. reduce A pop 2 (r= ) items from the stack; then push A and s, where s=goto[s m-r, A] ( S o X 1 S 1... X m S m, a i a i+1... a n $ ) ( S o X 1 S 1... X m-r S m-r A s, a i... a n $ ) Output is the reducing production A 3. Accept Parsing successfully completed 4. Error -- Parser detected an error (an empty entry in the action table) 94

85 Reduce Action Pop 2 (r= ) items from the stack; Assume that = Y 1 Y 2...Y r Push A and s where s=goto[s m-r, A] ( S o X 1 S 1... X m-r S m-r Y 1 S m-r+1...y r S m, a i a i+1... a n $ ) ( S o X 1 S 1... X m-r S m-r A s, a i... a n $ ) In fact, Y 1 Y 2...Y r is a handle. X 1... X m-r A a i... a n $ X 1... X m Y 1...Y r a i a i+1... a n $ 95

86 (SLR) Parsing Table 1) E E+T 2) E T 3) T T*F 4) T F 5) F (E) 6) F id Action Table Goto Table state id + * ( ) $ E T F 0 s5 s s6 acc 2 r2 s7 r2 r2 3 r4 r4 r4 r4 4 s5 s r6 r6 r6 r6 6 s5 s s5 s s6 s11 9 r1 s7 r1 r1 10 r3 r3 r3 r3 11 r5 r5 r5 r5 96

87 Moves of A LR-Parser Example stack input action output 0 id*id+id$ shift 5 0id5 *id+id$ reduce by F id F id 0F3 *id+id$ reduce by T F T F 0T2 *id+id$ shift 7 0T2*7 id+id$ shift 5 0T2*7id5 +id$ reduce by F id F id 0T2*7F10 +id$ reduce by T T*F T T*F 0T2 +id$ reduce by E T E T 0E1 +id$ shift 6 0E1+6 id$ shift 5 0E1+6id5 $ reduce by F id F id 0E1+6F3 $ reduce by T F T F 0E1+6T9 $ reduce by E E+T E E+T 0E1 $ accept 97

88 Constructing SLR Parsing Tables LR(0) Item An LR(0) item of a grammar G is a production of G with a dot at some position of the body. Ex: A abb Possible LR(0) Items: A.aBb (four different possibilities) A a.bb Reduction: Moving doc to the right end A ab.b A abb. A collection of sets of LR(0) items (the canonical LR(0) collection) is the basis for constructing SLR parsers. (LR(0) automation) The collection of sets of LR(0) items will be the states. Augmented Grammar: G is G with a new production rule S S where S is the new starting symbol. CLOSURE and GOTO function * 98

89 The Closure Operation If I is a set of LR(0) items for a grammar G, then closure(i) is the set of LR(0) items constructed from I by the two rules: 1. Initially, every LR(0) item in I is added to closure(i). 2. If A.B is in closure(i) and B is a production rule of G, then B. will be in the closure(i). Apply this rule until no more new LR(0) items can be added to closure(i). * 99

90 The Closure Operation -- Example E E closure({e.e}) = E E+T { E.E kernel item * E T T T*F T F F (E) F id E.E+T E.T T.T*F T.F F.(E) F.id } Kernel items : the initial item, S.S, and all items whose dots are not at the left end. Nonkernel items : all items with their dots at the left end, except for S'.S. 100

91 Goto Operation If I is a set of LR(0) items and X is a grammar symbol (terminal or non-terminal), then goto(i,x) is defined as follows: If A.X in I, then every item in closure({a X. }) will be in goto(i,x). Example: I ={ E.E, E.E+T, E.T, T.T*F, T.F, F.(E), F.id } goto(i,e) = { E E., E E.+T } goto(i,t) = { E T., T T.*F } goto(i,f) = {T F. } goto(i,() = { F (.E), E.E+T, E.T, T.T*F, T.F, F.(E), F.id } goto(i,id) = { F id. } 101

92 Construction of The Canonical LR(0) Collections To create the SLR parsing tables for a grammar G, we will create the canonical LR(0) collection of the grammar G. Algorithm: C is { closure({s.s}) } repeat the followings until no more set of LR(0) items can be added to C. for each I in C and each grammar symbol X if goto(i,x) is not empty and not in C add goto(i,x) to C goto function is a DFA on the sets in C. 102

93 The Canonical LR(0) Collection Example I 0 : E.E I 1 : E E. I 6 : E E+.T I 9 : E E+T. E.E+T E E.+T T.T*F T T.*F E.T T.F T.T*F I 2 : E T. F.(E) I 10 : T T*F. T.F T T.*F F.id F.(E) F.id I 3 : T F. I 7 : T T*.F I 11 : F (E). F.(E) I 4 : F (.E) F.id E.E+T E.T I 8 : F (E.) T.T*F E E.+T T.F F.(E) F.id I 5 : F id. 103

94 Transition Diagram (DFA) of Goto Function E I 0 I 1 T + I 6 T F ( id I 9 to I 3 to I 4 * to I 7 F ( id I 2 I 3 I 4 id I 5 * E T F ( I 7 I 8 to I 2 to I 3 to I 4 F ( id ) + to I 5 I 10 to I 4 to I 5 I 11 to I 6 104

95 Constructing SLR Parsing Table 1. Construct the canonical collection of sets of LR(0) items for G. C {I 0,...,I n } 2. Create the parsing action table as follows If a is a terminal, A.a in I i and goto(i i,a)=i j then action[i,a] is shift j. If A. is in I i, then action[i,a] is reduce A for all a in FOLLOW(A) where A S. If S S. is in I i, then action[i,$] is accept. If any conflicting actions generated by these rules, the grammar is not SLR. 3. Create the parsing goto table for all non-terminals A, if goto(i i,a)=i j then goto[i,a]=j 4. All entries not defined by (2) and (3) are errors. 5. Initial state of the parser contains S.S 105

96 Parsing Tables of Expression Grammar 1) E E+T 2) E T 3) T T*F 4) T F 5) F (E) 6) F id Action Table Goto Table state id + * ( ) $ E T F 0 s5 s s6 acc 2 r2 s7 r2 r2 3 r4 r4 r4 r4 4 s5 s r6 r6 r6 r6 6 s5 s s5 s s6 s11 9 r1 s7 r1 r1 10 r3 r3 r3 r3 11 r5 r5 r5 r5 106

97 SLR(1) Grammar An LR parser using SLR(1) parsing tables for a grammar G is called a SLR(1) parser for G. If a grammar G has an SLR(1) parsing table, it is called SLR(1) grammar (SLR grammar for short). Every SLR grammar is unambiguous, but not every unambiguous grammar is a SLR grammar. 107

98 Shift/Reduce and Reduce/Reduce Conflicts If a state does not know whether it will make a shift operation or reduction for a terminal, we say that there is a shift/reduce conflict. If a state does not know whether it will make a reduction operation using the production rule i or j for a terminal, we say that there is a reduce/reduce conflict. If the SLR parsing table of a grammar G has a conflict, we say that the grammar is not a SLR grammar. 108

99 Conflict Example 1 S L=R I 0 : S.S I 1 : S S. I 6 : S L=.R I 9 : S L=R. S R S.L=R R.L L *R S.R I 2 : S L.=R L.*R L id L.*R R L. L.id R L L.id R.L I 3 : S R. I 4 : L *.R I 7 : L *R. Problem R.L FOLLOW(R) = {=,$} L.*R I 8 : R L. = shift 6 L.id reduce by R L shift/reduce conflict I 5 : L id. 109

100 Conflict Example 2 S AaAb I 0 :S.S S BbBa S.AaAb A S.BbBa B A. B. Problem FOLLOW(A)={a,b} FOLLOW(B)={a,b} a reduce by A b reduce by A reduce by B reduce by B reduce/reduce conflict reduce/reduce conflict 110

101 Constructing Canonical LR(1) Items In SLR method, the state i makes a reduction by A when the current token is a: if the A. in the I i and a is in FOLLOW(A) In some situations, A cannot be followed by the terminal a in a right-sentential form when and the state i are on the top stack. This means that making reduction in this case is not correct. Consider previous example 1 111

102 LR(1) Item To avoid some of invalid reductions, the states need to carry more information. Extra information is put into a state by including a terminal symbol as a second component in an item. A LR(1) item is: A.,a where a is the look-ahead of the LR(1) item a is a terminal or end-marker. 112

103 LR(1) Item Cont d When ( in the LR(1) item A.,a ) is not empty, the lookahead does not have any effect. When is empty (A.,a ), we do the reduction by A only if the next input symbol is a (not for any terminal in FOLLOW(A)). A state will contain A.,a 1... A.,a n where {a 1,...,a n } FOLLOW(A) 113

104 A Short Notation A set of LR(1) items containing the following items A.,a 1... A.,a n can be written as A.,a 1 /a 2 /.../a n 114

105 Canonical Collection of Sets of LR(1) Items The construction of the canonical collection of the sets of LR(1) items are similar to that of the sets of LR(0) items, except that closure and goto operations work a little bit different. closure(i) is: ( where I is a set of LR(1) items) every LR(1) item in I is in closure(i) if A.B,a in closure(i) and B is a production rule of G; then B.,b will be in the closure(i) for each terminal b in FIRST( a). 115

106 goto operation If I is a set of LR(1) items and X is a grammar symbol (terminal or non-terminal), then goto(i,x) is defined as follows: If A.X,a in I then every item in closure({a X.,a}) will be in goto(i,x). 116

107 Construction of The Canonical LR(1) Collection Algorithm: C is { closure({s.s,$}) } repeat the followings until no more set of LR(1) items can be added to C. for each I in C and each grammar symbol X if goto(i,x) is not empty and not in C add goto(i,x) to C goto function is a DFA on the sets in C. 117

108 Canonical LR(1) Collection Example 1 S S 1) S L=R 2) S R 3) L *R 4) L id 5) R L I 0 :S.S,$ S.L=R,$ S.R,$ L.*R,$/= L.id,$/= R.L,$ S I 1 :S S.,$ * LI 2 :S L.=R,$ R L.,$ R I 3 :S R.,$ = to I 6 I 4 :L *.R,$/= R.L,$/= L.*R,$/= L.id,$/= id I 5 :L id.,$/= R L * id to I 7 to I 8 to I 4 to I 5 I 6 :S L=.R,$ R.L,$ L.*R,$ L.id,$ I 7 :L *R.,$/= I 8 : R L.,$/= R L * id to I 9 to I 10 to I 11 to I 12 I 9 :S L=R.,$ I 10 :R L.,$ I 11 :L *.R,$ R.L,$ L.*R,$ L.id,$ I 12 :L id.,$ R L * id to I 13 to I 10 to I 11 to I 12 I 13 :L *R.,$ I 4 and I 11 I 5 and I 12 I 7 and I 13 I 8 and I

109 Canonical LR(1) Collection Example 2 S AaAb I 0 : S.S,$ S I 1 : S S.,$ S BbBa S.AaAb,$ A A S.BbBa,$ B A.,a B I 2 : S A.aAb,$ B.,b I 3 : S B.bBa,$ I 4 : S Aa.Ab,$ A I 6 : S AaA.b,$ b I 8 : S AaAb.,$ A.,b I 5 : S Bb.Ba,$ B I 7 : S BbB.a,$ a I 9 : S BbBa.,$ B.,a a b to I 4 to I 5 119

110 Construction of LR(1) Parsing Tables 1. Construct the canonical collection of sets of LR(1) items for G. C {I 0,...,I n } 2. Create the parsing action table as follows If a is a terminal, A.a,b in I i and goto(i i,a)=i j then action[i,a] is shift j. If A.,a is in I i, then action[i,a] is reduce A where A S. If S S.,$ is in I i, then action[i,$] is accept. If any conflicting actions generated by these rules, the grammar is not LR(1). 3. Create the parsing goto table for all non-terminals A, if goto(i i,a)=i j then goto[i,a]=j 4. All entries not defined by (2) and (3) are errors. 5. Initial state of the parser contains S.S,$ 120

111 LR(1) Parsing Tables for Example 1 id * = $ S L R 0 s5 s acc 2 s6 r5 3 r2 4 s5 s r4 r4 6 s12 s r3 r3 8 r5 r5 9 r1 10 r5 11 s12 s r4 13 r3 no shift/reduce or no reduce/reduce conflict so, it is a LR(1) grammar 121

112 LALR Parsing Tables LALR stands for LookAhead LR. LALR parsers are often used in practice because LALR parsing tables are smaller than LR(1) parsing tables. The number of states in SLR and LALR parsing tables for a grammar G are equal. But LALR parsers recognize more grammars than SLR parsers. A state of LALR parser will be a set of LR(1) items with modifications. Yacc creates a LALR parser for the given grammar. 122

113 The Core of A Set of LR(1) Items The core of a set of LR(1) items is the set of its first component. S L.=R,$ S L.=R Core R L.,$ R L. Find the states (sets of LR(1) items) in a canonical LR(1) parser with the same core, and merge them into a single state. I 1 :L id.,= A new state: I 12 : L id.,=/$ I 2 :L id.,$ Do this for all states of a canonical LR(1) parser to get the states of the LALR parser. 123

114 Creating LALR Parsing Tables Canonical LR(1) Parser LALR Parser shrink # of states This shrink process may introduce a reduce/reduce conflict in the resulting LALR parser (so the grammar is NOT LALR) But, this shrink process does not produce a shift/reduce conflict. 124

115 Shift/Reduce Conflict We cannot introduce a shift/reduce conflict during the shrinking process for the creation of the states of a LALR parser. Assume that we can introduce a shift/reduce conflict. In this case, a state of LALR parser must have: A.,a and B.a,b This means that a state of the canonical LR(1) parser must have: A.,a and B.a,c But, this state has also a shift/reduce conflict. i.e. The original canonical LR(1) parser has a conflict. Contradiction! 125

116 Reduce/Reduce Conflict But, we may introduce a reduce/reduce conflict during the shrink process for the creation of the states of a LALR parser. I 1 : A.,a I 2 : A.,b B.,b B.,c I 12 : A.,a/b reduce/reduce conflict B.,b/c 126

117 Creation of LALR Parsing Tables Create the canonical LR(1) collection of the sets of LR(1) items for the given grammar. For each core, find all sets having it, and replace those sets into a single set. C={I 0,...,I n } C ={J 0,...,J m } where m n Create the parsing table (action and goto tables) the same way as that of LR(1) parser. Note: If J=I 1... I k, since I 1,...,I k have the same core cores of goto(i 1,X),...,goto(I k,x) must be same. So, goto(j,x)=k where K is the union of all sets of items having the same core as goto(i 1,X). If no conflict is introduced, the grammar is LALR(1) grammar. 127

118 Canonical LR(1) Collection Example 1 S S 1) S L=R 2) S R 3) L *R 4) L id 5) R L I 0 :S.S,$ S.L=R,$ S.R,$ L.*R,$/= L.id,$/= R.L,$ I 1 :S S.,$ S * LI 2 :S L.=R,$ R L.,$ R I 3 :S R.,$ to I 6 I 4 :L *.R,$/= R.L,$/= L.*R,$/= L.id,$/= id I 5 :L id.,$/= R L * id to I 7 to I 8 to I 4 to I 5 I 6 :S L=.R,$ R.L,$ L.*R,$ L.id,$ I 7 :L *R.,$/= I 8 : R L.,$/= R L * id to I 9 to I 10 to I 11 to I 12 I 9 :S L=R.,$ I 10 :R L.,$ I 11 :L *.R,$ R.L,$ L.*R,$ L.id,$ I 12 :L id.,$ R L * id I 13 :L *R.,$ Merging? I 4 and I 11 to I 13 I to I 5 and I to I I 11 7 and I 13 to I 12 I 8 and I

119 Canonical LALR(1) Collection Example 1 S S 1) S L=R 2) S R 3) L *R 4) L id 5) R L I 0 :S.S,$ S.L=R,$ S.R,$ L.*R,$/= L.id,$/= R.L,$ I 1 :S S.,$ S * LI 2 :S L.=R,$ R L.,$ R I 3 :S R.,$ id I 411 :L *.R,$/= R.L,$/= to I 6 L.*R,$/= L.id,$/= I 512 :L id.,$/= R L * id to I 713 to I 810 to I 411 to I 512 I 6 :S L=.R,$ R.L,$ L.*R,$ L.id,$ I 713 :L *R.,$/= R L * id to I 9 to I 810 to I 411 to I 512 I 9 :S L=R.,$ Same Cores I 4 and I 11 I 5 and I 12 I 7 and I 13 I 810 : R L.,$/= Let s construct the parsing table! I 8 and I

120 LALR(1) Parsing Tables for Example2 id * = $ S L R 0 s5 s acc 2 s6 r5 3 r2 4 s5 s r4 r4 6 s12 s r3 r3 8 r5 r5 9 r1 no shift/reduce or no reduce/reduce conflict so, it is a LALR(1) grammar 130

121 Homework Exercise Exercise 4.4.1(e), Exercise Exercise Due date: Oct. 31,

122 Summary Parsers, Context-free grammar, Derivations, Parse Trees, Ambiguity, Top- Down and Bottom-up Parsing, Design of Grammars, Recursive-Decent Parsers LL(1) parsers, Shift-reduce parsing, Viable prefixes, Valid Items, 140

LALR Parsing. What Yacc and most compilers employ.

LALR Parsing. What Yacc and most compilers employ. LALR Parsing Canonical sets of LR(1) items Number of states much larger than in the SLR construction LR(1) = Order of thousands for a standard prog. Lang. SLR(1) = order of hundreds for a standard prog.

More information

LR Parsing Techniques

LR Parsing Techniques LR Parsing Techniques Introduction Bottom-Up Parsing LR Parsing as Handle Pruning Shift-Reduce Parser LR(k) Parsing Model Parsing Table Construction: SLR, LR, LALR 1 Bottom-UP Parsing A bottom-up parser

More information

Bottom up parsing. The sentential forms happen to be a right most derivation in the reverse order. S a A B e a A d e. a A d e a A B e S.

Bottom up parsing. The sentential forms happen to be a right most derivation in the reverse order. S a A B e a A d e. a A d e a A B e S. Bottom up parsing Construct a parse tree for an input string beginning at leaves and going towards root OR Reduce a string w of input to start symbol of grammar Consider a grammar S aabe A Abc b B d And

More information

3. Syntax Analysis. Andrea Polini. Formal Languages and Compilers Master in Computer Science University of Camerino

3. Syntax Analysis. Andrea Polini. Formal Languages and Compilers Master in Computer Science University of Camerino 3. Syntax Analysis Andrea Polini Formal Languages and Compilers Master in Computer Science University of Camerino (Formal Languages and Compilers) 3. Syntax Analysis CS@UNICAM 1 / 54 Syntax Analysis: the

More information

Principles of Programming Languages

Principles of Programming Languages Principles of Programming Languages h"p://www.di.unipi.it/~andrea/dida2ca/plp- 14/ Prof. Andrea Corradini Department of Computer Science, Pisa Lesson 8! Bo;om- Up Parsing Shi?- Reduce LR(0) automata and

More information

UNIT-III BOTTOM-UP PARSING

UNIT-III BOTTOM-UP PARSING UNIT-III BOTTOM-UP PARSING Constructing a parse tree for an input string beginning at the leaves and going towards the root is called bottom-up parsing. A general type of bottom-up parser is a shift-reduce

More information

Section A. A grammar that produces more than one parse tree for some sentences is said to be ambiguous.

Section A. A grammar that produces more than one parse tree for some sentences is said to be ambiguous. Section A 1. What do you meant by parser and its types? A parser for grammar G is a program that takes as input a string w and produces as output either a parse tree for w, if w is a sentence of G, or

More information

Syntax Analysis (Parsing)

Syntax Analysis (Parsing) An overview of parsing Functions & Responsibilities Context Free Grammars Concepts & Terminology Writing and Designing Grammars Syntax Analysis (Parsing) Resolving Grammar Problems / Difficulties Top-Down

More information

LR Parsing Techniques

LR Parsing Techniques LR Parsing Techniques Bottom-Up Parsing - LR: a special form of BU Parser LR Parsing as Handle Pruning Shift-Reduce Parser (LR Implementation) LR(k) Parsing Model - k lookaheads to determine next action

More information

SYNTAX ANALYSIS 1. Define parser. Hierarchical analysis is one in which the tokens are grouped hierarchically into nested collections with collective meaning. Also termed as Parsing. 2. Mention the basic

More information

Table-Driven Parsing

Table-Driven Parsing Table-Driven Parsing It is possible to build a non-recursive predictive parser by maintaining a stack explicitly, rather than implicitly via recursive calls [1] The non-recursive parser looks up the production

More information

Parsing. Handle, viable prefix, items, closures, goto s LR(k): SLR(1), LR(1), LALR(1)

Parsing. Handle, viable prefix, items, closures, goto s LR(k): SLR(1), LR(1), LALR(1) TD parsing - LL(1) Parsing First and Follow sets Parse table construction BU Parsing Handle, viable prefix, items, closures, goto s LR(k): SLR(1), LR(1), LALR(1) Problems with SLR Aho, Sethi, Ullman, Compilers

More information

Syn S t yn a t x a Ana x lysi y s si 1

Syn S t yn a t x a Ana x lysi y s si 1 Syntax Analysis 1 Position of a Parser in the Compiler Model Source Program Lexical Analyzer Token, tokenval Get next token Parser and rest of front-end Intermediate representation Lexical error Syntax

More information

PART 3 - SYNTAX ANALYSIS. F. Wotawa TU Graz) Compiler Construction Summer term / 309

PART 3 - SYNTAX ANALYSIS. F. Wotawa TU Graz) Compiler Construction Summer term / 309 PART 3 - SYNTAX ANALYSIS F. Wotawa (IST @ TU Graz) Compiler Construction Summer term 2016 64 / 309 Goals Definition of the syntax of a programming language using context free grammars Methods for parsing

More information

WWW.STUDENTSFOCUS.COM UNIT -3 SYNTAX ANALYSIS 3.1 ROLE OF THE PARSER Parser obtains a string of tokens from the lexical analyzer and verifies that it can be generated by the language for the source program.

More information

Bottom-up parsing. Bottom-Up Parsing. Recall. Goal: For a grammar G, withstartsymbols, any string α such that S α is called a sentential form

Bottom-up parsing. Bottom-Up Parsing. Recall. Goal: For a grammar G, withstartsymbols, any string α such that S α is called a sentential form Bottom-up parsing Bottom-up parsing Recall Goal: For a grammar G, withstartsymbols, any string α such that S α is called a sentential form If α V t,thenα is called a sentence in L(G) Otherwise it is just

More information

A left-sentential form is a sentential form that occurs in the leftmost derivation of some sentence.

A left-sentential form is a sentential form that occurs in the leftmost derivation of some sentence. Bottom-up parsing Recall For a grammar G, with start symbol S, any string α such that S α is a sentential form If α V t, then α is a sentence in L(G) A left-sentential form is a sentential form that occurs

More information

MODULE 14 SLR PARSER LR(0) ITEMS

MODULE 14 SLR PARSER LR(0) ITEMS MODULE 14 SLR PARSER LR(0) ITEMS In this module we shall discuss one of the LR type parser namely SLR parser. The various steps involved in the SLR parser will be discussed with a focus on the construction

More information

Syntax Analysis. Martin Sulzmann. Martin Sulzmann Syntax Analysis 1 / 38

Syntax Analysis. Martin Sulzmann. Martin Sulzmann Syntax Analysis 1 / 38 Syntax Analysis Martin Sulzmann Martin Sulzmann Syntax Analysis 1 / 38 Syntax Analysis Objective Recognize individual tokens as sentences of a language (beyond regular languages). Example 1 (OK) Program

More information

Parsing. Roadmap. > Context-free grammars > Derivations and precedence > Top-down parsing > Left-recursion > Look-ahead > Table-driven parsing

Parsing. Roadmap. > Context-free grammars > Derivations and precedence > Top-down parsing > Left-recursion > Look-ahead > Table-driven parsing Roadmap > Context-free grammars > Derivations and precedence > Top-down parsing > Left-recursion > Look-ahead > Table-driven parsing The role of the parser > performs context-free syntax analysis > guides

More information

Acknowledgements. The slides for this lecture are a modified versions of the offering by Prof. Sanjeev K Aggarwal

Acknowledgements. The slides for this lecture are a modified versions of the offering by Prof. Sanjeev K Aggarwal Acknowledgements The slides for this lecture are a modified versions of the offering by Prof. Sanjeev K Aggarwal Syntax Analysis Check syntax and construct abstract syntax tree if == = ; b 0 a b Error

More information

Syntax Analysis. Amitabha Sanyal. (www.cse.iitb.ac.in/ as) Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay

Syntax Analysis. Amitabha Sanyal. (www.cse.iitb.ac.in/ as) Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay Syntax Analysis (www.cse.iitb.ac.in/ as) Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay September 2007 College of Engineering, Pune Syntax Analysis: 2/124 Syntax

More information

Top down vs. bottom up parsing

Top down vs. bottom up parsing Parsing A grammar describes the strings that are syntactically legal A recogniser simply accepts or rejects strings A generator produces sentences in the language described by the grammar A parser constructs

More information

8 Parsing. Parsing. Top Down Parsing Methods. Parsing complexity. Top down vs. bottom up parsing. Top down vs. bottom up parsing

8 Parsing. Parsing. Top Down Parsing Methods. Parsing complexity. Top down vs. bottom up parsing. Top down vs. bottom up parsing 8 Parsing Parsing A grammar describes syntactically legal strings in a language A recogniser simply accepts or rejects strings A generator produces strings A parser constructs a parse tree for a string

More information

Compilerconstructie. najaar Rudy van Vliet kamer 140 Snellius, tel rvvliet(at)liacs(dot)nl. college 3, vrijdag 22 september 2017

Compilerconstructie. najaar Rudy van Vliet kamer 140 Snellius, tel rvvliet(at)liacs(dot)nl. college 3, vrijdag 22 september 2017 Compilerconstructie najaar 2017 http://www.liacs.leidenuniv.nl/~vlietrvan1/coco/ Rudy van Vliet kamer 140 Snellius, tel. 071-527 2876 rvvliet(at)liacs(dot)nl college 3, vrijdag 22 september 2017 + werkcollege

More information

Formal Languages and Compilers Lecture VII Part 3: Syntactic A

Formal Languages and Compilers Lecture VII Part 3: Syntactic A Formal Languages and Compilers Lecture VII Part 3: Syntactic Analysis Free University of Bozen-Bolzano Faculty of Computer Science POS Building, Room: 2.03 artale@inf.unibz.it http://www.inf.unibz.it/

More information

Introduction to parsers

Introduction to parsers Syntax Analysis Introduction to parsers Context-free grammars Push-down automata Top-down parsing LL grammars and parsers Bottom-up parsing LR grammars and parsers Bison/Yacc - parser generators Error

More information

MIT Parse Table Construction. Martin Rinard Laboratory for Computer Science Massachusetts Institute of Technology

MIT Parse Table Construction. Martin Rinard Laboratory for Computer Science Massachusetts Institute of Technology MIT 6.035 Parse Table Construction Martin Rinard Laboratory for Computer Science Massachusetts Institute of Technology Parse Tables (Review) ACTION Goto State ( ) $ X s0 shift to s2 error error goto s1

More information

Bottom-Up Parsing. Parser Generation. LR Parsing. Constructing LR Parser

Bottom-Up Parsing. Parser Generation. LR Parsing. Constructing LR Parser Parser Generation Main Problem: given a grammar G, how to build a top-down parser or a bottom-up parser for it? parser : a program that, given a sentence, reconstructs a derivation for that sentence ----

More information

CSE P 501 Compilers. LR Parsing Hal Perkins Spring UW CSE P 501 Spring 2018 D-1

CSE P 501 Compilers. LR Parsing Hal Perkins Spring UW CSE P 501 Spring 2018 D-1 CSE P 501 Compilers LR Parsing Hal Perkins Spring 2018 UW CSE P 501 Spring 2018 D-1 Agenda LR Parsing Table-driven Parsers Parser States Shift-Reduce and Reduce-Reduce conflicts UW CSE P 501 Spring 2018

More information

CA Compiler Construction

CA Compiler Construction CA4003 - Compiler Construction David Sinclair A top-down parser starts with the root of the parse tree, labelled with the goal symbol of the grammar, and repeats the following steps until the fringe of

More information

CMSC 330: Organization of Programming Languages

CMSC 330: Organization of Programming Languages CMSC 330: Organization of Programming Languages Context Free Grammars and Parsing 1 Recall: Architecture of Compilers, Interpreters Source Parser Static Analyzer Intermediate Representation Front End Back

More information

Compiler Construction 2016/2017 Syntax Analysis

Compiler Construction 2016/2017 Syntax Analysis Compiler Construction 2016/2017 Syntax Analysis Peter Thiemann November 2, 2016 Outline 1 Syntax Analysis Recursive top-down parsing Nonrecursive top-down parsing Bottom-up parsing Syntax Analysis tokens

More information

Concepts Introduced in Chapter 4

Concepts Introduced in Chapter 4 Concepts Introduced in Chapter 4 Grammars Context-Free Grammars Derivations and Parse Trees Ambiguity, Precedence, and Associativity Top Down Parsing Recursive Descent, LL Bottom Up Parsing SLR, LR, LALR

More information

CS 321 Programming Languages and Compilers. VI. Parsing

CS 321 Programming Languages and Compilers. VI. Parsing CS 321 Programming Languages and Compilers VI. Parsing Parsing Calculate grammatical structure of program, like diagramming sentences, where: Tokens = words Programs = sentences For further information,

More information

3. Parsing. Oscar Nierstrasz

3. Parsing. Oscar Nierstrasz 3. Parsing Oscar Nierstrasz Thanks to Jens Palsberg and Tony Hosking for their kind permission to reuse and adapt the CS132 and CS502 lecture notes. http://www.cs.ucla.edu/~palsberg/ http://www.cs.purdue.edu/homes/hosking/

More information

Compiler Design 1. Bottom-UP Parsing. Goutam Biswas. Lect 6

Compiler Design 1. Bottom-UP Parsing. Goutam Biswas. Lect 6 Compiler Design 1 Bottom-UP Parsing Compiler Design 2 The Process The parse tree is built starting from the leaf nodes labeled by the terminals (tokens). The parser tries to discover appropriate reductions,

More information

SYED AMMAL ENGINEERING COLLEGE (An ISO 9001:2008 Certified Institution) Dr. E.M. Abdullah Campus, Ramanathapuram

SYED AMMAL ENGINEERING COLLEGE (An ISO 9001:2008 Certified Institution) Dr. E.M. Abdullah Campus, Ramanathapuram CS6660 COMPILER DESIGN Question Bank UNIT I-INTRODUCTION TO COMPILERS 1. Define compiler. 2. Differentiate compiler and interpreter. 3. What is a language processing system? 4. List four software tools

More information

Downloaded from Page 1. LR Parsing

Downloaded from  Page 1. LR Parsing Downloaded from http://himadri.cmsdu.org Page 1 LR Parsing We first understand Context Free Grammars. Consider the input string: x+2*y When scanned by a scanner, it produces the following stream of tokens:

More information

Principles of Compiler Design Presented by, R.Venkadeshan,M.Tech-IT, Lecturer /CSE Dept, Chettinad College of Engineering &Technology

Principles of Compiler Design Presented by, R.Venkadeshan,M.Tech-IT, Lecturer /CSE Dept, Chettinad College of Engineering &Technology Principles of Compiler Design Presented by, R.Venkadeshan,M.Tech-IT, Lecturer /CSE Dept, Chettinad College of Engineering &Technology 6/30/2010 Principles of Compiler Design R.Venkadeshan 1 Preliminaries

More information

Parsing Wrapup. Roadmap (Where are we?) Last lecture Shift-reduce parser LR(1) parsing. This lecture LR(1) parsing

Parsing Wrapup. Roadmap (Where are we?) Last lecture Shift-reduce parser LR(1) parsing. This lecture LR(1) parsing Parsing Wrapup Roadmap (Where are we?) Last lecture Shift-reduce parser LR(1) parsing LR(1) items Computing closure Computing goto LR(1) canonical collection This lecture LR(1) parsing Building ACTION

More information

Context-free grammars

Context-free grammars Context-free grammars Section 4.2 Formal way of specifying rules about the structure/syntax of a program terminals - tokens non-terminals - represent higher-level structures of a program start symbol,

More information

Note that for recursive descent to work, if A ::= B1 B2 is a grammar rule we need First k (B1) disjoint from First k (B2).

Note that for recursive descent to work, if A ::= B1 B2 is a grammar rule we need First k (B1) disjoint from First k (B2). LL(k) Grammars We need a bunch of terminology. For any terminal string a we write First k (a) is the prefix of a of length k (or all of a if its length is less than k) For any string g of terminal and

More information

Wednesday, September 9, 15. Parsers

Wednesday, September 9, 15. Parsers Parsers What is a parser A parser has two jobs: 1) Determine whether a string (program) is valid (think: grammatically correct) 2) Determine the structure of a program (think: diagramming a sentence) Agenda

More information

Parsers. What is a parser. Languages. Agenda. Terminology. Languages. A parser has two jobs:

Parsers. What is a parser. Languages. Agenda. Terminology. Languages. A parser has two jobs: What is a parser Parsers A parser has two jobs: 1) Determine whether a string (program) is valid (think: grammatically correct) 2) Determine the structure of a program (think: diagramming a sentence) Agenda

More information

UNIT III & IV. Bottom up parsing

UNIT III & IV. Bottom up parsing UNIT III & IV Bottom up parsing 5.0 Introduction Given a grammar and a sentence belonging to that grammar, if we have to show that the given sentence belongs to the given grammar, there are two methods.

More information

Compiler Construction: Parsing

Compiler Construction: Parsing Compiler Construction: Parsing Mandar Mitra Indian Statistical Institute M. Mitra (ISI) Parsing 1 / 33 Context-free grammars. Reference: Section 4.2 Formal way of specifying rules about the structure/syntax

More information

Principle of Compilers Lecture IV Part 4: Syntactic Analysis. Alessandro Artale

Principle of Compilers Lecture IV Part 4: Syntactic Analysis. Alessandro Artale Free University of Bolzano Principles of Compilers Lecture IV Part 4, 2003/2004 AArtale (1) Principle of Compilers Lecture IV Part 4: Syntactic Analysis Alessandro Artale Faculty of Computer Science Free

More information

Let us construct the LR(1) items for the grammar given below to construct the LALR parsing table.

Let us construct the LR(1) items for the grammar given below to construct the LALR parsing table. MODULE 18 LALR parsing After understanding the most powerful CALR parser, in this module we will learn to construct the LALR parser. The CALR parser has a large set of items and hence the LALR parser is

More information

LR Parsers. Aditi Raste, CCOEW

LR Parsers. Aditi Raste, CCOEW LR Parsers Aditi Raste, CCOEW 1 LR Parsers Most powerful shift-reduce parsers and yet efficient. LR(k) parsing L : left to right scanning of input R : constructing rightmost derivation in reverse k : number

More information

Formal Languages and Compilers Lecture VII Part 4: Syntactic A

Formal Languages and Compilers Lecture VII Part 4: Syntactic A Formal Languages and Compilers Lecture VII Part 4: Syntactic Analysis Free University of Bozen-Bolzano Faculty of Computer Science POS Building, Room: 2.03 artale@inf.unibz.it http://www.inf.unibz.it/

More information

Where We Are. CMSC 330: Organization of Programming Languages. This Lecture. Programming Languages. Motivation for Grammars

Where We Are. CMSC 330: Organization of Programming Languages. This Lecture. Programming Languages. Motivation for Grammars CMSC 330: Organization of Programming Languages Context Free Grammars Where We Are Programming languages Ruby OCaml Implementing programming languages Scanner Uses regular expressions Finite automata Parser

More information

Syntax Analysis Part I

Syntax Analysis Part I Syntax Analysis Part I Chapter 4: Context-Free Grammars Slides adapted from : Robert van Engelen, Florida State University Position of a Parser in the Compiler Model Source Program Lexical Analyzer Token,

More information

CMSC 330: Organization of Programming Languages. Architecture of Compilers, Interpreters

CMSC 330: Organization of Programming Languages. Architecture of Compilers, Interpreters : Organization of Programming Languages Context Free Grammars 1 Architecture of Compilers, Interpreters Source Scanner Parser Static Analyzer Intermediate Representation Front End Back End Compiler / Interpreter

More information

VIVA QUESTIONS WITH ANSWERS

VIVA QUESTIONS WITH ANSWERS VIVA QUESTIONS WITH ANSWERS 1. What is a compiler? A compiler is a program that reads a program written in one language the source language and translates it into an equivalent program in another language-the

More information

LR Parsing. Leftmost and Rightmost Derivations. Compiler Design CSE 504. Derivations for id + id: T id = id+id. 1 Shift-Reduce Parsing.

LR Parsing. Leftmost and Rightmost Derivations. Compiler Design CSE 504. Derivations for id + id: T id = id+id. 1 Shift-Reduce Parsing. LR Parsing Compiler Design CSE 504 1 Shift-Reduce Parsing 2 LR Parsers 3 SLR and LR(1) Parsers Last modifled: Fri Mar 06 2015 at 13:50:06 EST Version: 1.7 16:58:46 2016/01/29 Compiled at 12:57 on 2016/02/26

More information

CSE 401 Compilers. LR Parsing Hal Perkins Autumn /10/ Hal Perkins & UW CSE D-1

CSE 401 Compilers. LR Parsing Hal Perkins Autumn /10/ Hal Perkins & UW CSE D-1 CSE 401 Compilers LR Parsing Hal Perkins Autumn 2011 10/10/2011 2002-11 Hal Perkins & UW CSE D-1 Agenda LR Parsing Table-driven Parsers Parser States Shift-Reduce and Reduce-Reduce conflicts 10/10/2011

More information

Parsers. Xiaokang Qiu Purdue University. August 31, 2018 ECE 468

Parsers. Xiaokang Qiu Purdue University. August 31, 2018 ECE 468 Parsers Xiaokang Qiu Purdue University ECE 468 August 31, 2018 What is a parser A parser has two jobs: 1) Determine whether a string (program) is valid (think: grammatically correct) 2) Determine the structure

More information

Parser Generation. Bottom-Up Parsing. Constructing LR Parser. LR Parsing. Construct parse tree bottom-up --- from leaves to the root

Parser Generation. Bottom-Up Parsing. Constructing LR Parser. LR Parsing. Construct parse tree bottom-up --- from leaves to the root Parser Generation Main Problem: given a grammar G, how to build a top-down parser or a bottom-up parser for it? parser : a program that, given a sentence, reconstructs a derivation for that sentence ----

More information

Monday, September 13, Parsers

Monday, September 13, Parsers Parsers Agenda Terminology LL(1) Parsers Overview of LR Parsing Terminology Grammar G = (Vt, Vn, S, P) Vt is the set of terminals Vn is the set of non-terminals S is the start symbol P is the set of productions

More information

Syntactic Analysis. Chapter 4. Compiler Construction Syntactic Analysis 1

Syntactic Analysis. Chapter 4. Compiler Construction Syntactic Analysis 1 Syntactic Analysis Chapter 4 Compiler Construction Syntactic Analysis 1 Context-free Grammars The syntax of programming language constructs can be described by context-free grammars (CFGs) Relatively simple

More information

Compiler Design. Spring Syntactic Analysis. Sample Exercises and Solutions. Prof. Pedro C. Diniz

Compiler Design. Spring Syntactic Analysis. Sample Exercises and Solutions. Prof. Pedro C. Diniz Compiler Design Spring 2010 Syntactic Analysis Sample Exercises and Solutions Prof. Pedro C. Diniz USC / Information Sciences Institute 4676 Admiralty Way, Suite 1001 Marina del Rey, California 90292 pedro@isi.edu

More information

CSC 4181 Compiler Construction. Parsing. Outline. Introduction

CSC 4181 Compiler Construction. Parsing. Outline. Introduction CC 4181 Compiler Construction Parsing 1 Outline Top-down v.s. Bottom-up Top-down parsing Recursive-descent parsing LL1) parsing LL1) parsing algorithm First and follow sets Constructing LL1) parsing table

More information

Architecture of Compilers, Interpreters. CMSC 330: Organization of Programming Languages. Front End Scanner and Parser. Implementing the Front End

Architecture of Compilers, Interpreters. CMSC 330: Organization of Programming Languages. Front End Scanner and Parser. Implementing the Front End Architecture of Compilers, Interpreters : Organization of Programming Languages ource Analyzer Optimizer Code Generator Context Free Grammars Intermediate Representation Front End Back End Compiler / Interpreter

More information

Parsing. Rupesh Nasre. CS3300 Compiler Design IIT Madras July 2018

Parsing. Rupesh Nasre. CS3300 Compiler Design IIT Madras July 2018 Parsing Rupesh Nasre. CS3300 Compiler Design IIT Madras July 2018 Character stream Lexical Analyzer Machine-Independent Code Code Optimizer F r o n t e n d Token stream Syntax Analyzer Syntax tree Semantic

More information

The analysis part breaks up the source program into constituent pieces and creates an intermediate representation of the source program.

The analysis part breaks up the source program into constituent pieces and creates an intermediate representation of the source program. COMPILER DESIGN 1. What is a compiler? A compiler is a program that reads a program written in one language the source language and translates it into an equivalent program in another language-the target

More information

General Overview of Compiler

General Overview of Compiler General Overview of Compiler Compiler: - It is a complex program by which we convert any high level programming language (source code) into machine readable code. Interpreter: - It performs the same task

More information

S Y N T A X A N A L Y S I S LR

S Y N T A X A N A L Y S I S LR LR parsing There are three commonly used algorithms to build tables for an LR parser: 1. SLR(1) = LR(0) plus use of FOLLOW set to select between actions smallest class of grammars smallest tables (number

More information

Syntax Analyzer --- Parser

Syntax Analyzer --- Parser Syntax Analyzer --- Parser ASU Textbook Chapter 4.2--4.9 (w/o error handling) Tsan-sheng Hsu tshsu@iis.sinica.edu.tw http://www.iis.sinica.edu.tw/~tshsu 1 A program represented by a sequence of tokens

More information

Table-driven using an explicit stack (no recursion!). Stack can be viewed as containing both terminals and non-terminals.

Table-driven using an explicit stack (no recursion!). Stack can be viewed as containing both terminals and non-terminals. Bottom-up Parsing: Table-driven using an explicit stack (no recursion!). Stack can be viewed as containing both terminals and non-terminals. Basic operation is to shift terminals from the input to the

More information

Syntax Analysis: Context-free Grammars, Pushdown Automata and Parsing Part - 4. Y.N. Srikant

Syntax Analysis: Context-free Grammars, Pushdown Automata and Parsing Part - 4. Y.N. Srikant Syntax Analysis: Context-free Grammars, Pushdown Automata and Part - 4 Department of Computer Science and Automation Indian Institute of Science Bangalore 560 012 NPTEL Course on Principles of Compiler

More information

CMSC 330: Organization of Programming Languages. Context Free Grammars

CMSC 330: Organization of Programming Languages. Context Free Grammars CMSC 330: Organization of Programming Languages Context Free Grammars 1 Architecture of Compilers, Interpreters Source Analyzer Optimizer Code Generator Abstract Syntax Tree Front End Back End Compiler

More information

QUESTIONS RELATED TO UNIT I, II And III

QUESTIONS RELATED TO UNIT I, II And III QUESTIONS RELATED TO UNIT I, II And III UNIT I 1. Define the role of input buffer in lexical analysis 2. Write regular expression to generate identifiers give examples. 3. Define the elements of production.

More information

CMSC 330: Organization of Programming Languages. Context Free Grammars

CMSC 330: Organization of Programming Languages. Context Free Grammars CMSC 330: Organization of Programming Languages Context Free Grammars 1 Architecture of Compilers, Interpreters Source Analyzer Optimizer Code Generator Abstract Syntax Tree Front End Back End Compiler

More information

CMSC 330: Organization of Programming Languages

CMSC 330: Organization of Programming Languages CMSC 330: Organization of Programming Languages Context Free Grammars 1 Architecture of Compilers, Interpreters Source Analyzer Optimizer Code Generator Abstract Syntax Tree Front End Back End Compiler

More information

CMSC 330: Organization of Programming Languages

CMSC 330: Organization of Programming Languages CMSC 330: Organization of Programming Languages Context Free Grammars 1 Architecture of Compilers, Interpreters Source Analyzer Optimizer Code Generator Abstract Syntax Tree Front End Back End Compiler

More information

LR Parsing, Part 2. Constructing Parse Tables. An NFA Recognizing Viable Prefixes. Computing the Closure. GOTO Function and DFA States

LR Parsing, Part 2. Constructing Parse Tables. An NFA Recognizing Viable Prefixes. Computing the Closure. GOTO Function and DFA States TDDD16 Compilers and Interpreters TDDB44 Compiler Construction LR Parsing, Part 2 Constructing Parse Tables Parse table construction Grammar conflict handling Categories of LR Grammars and Parsers An NFA

More information

Wednesday, August 31, Parsers

Wednesday, August 31, Parsers Parsers How do we combine tokens? Combine tokens ( words in a language) to form programs ( sentences in a language) Not all combinations of tokens are correct programs (not all sentences are grammatically

More information

shift-reduce parsing

shift-reduce parsing Parsing #2 Bottom-up Parsing Rightmost derivations; use of rules from right to left Uses a stack to push symbols the concatenation of the stack symbols with the rest of the input forms a valid bottom-up

More information

Compilers. Yannis Smaragdakis, U. Athens (original slides by Sam

Compilers. Yannis Smaragdakis, U. Athens (original slides by Sam Compilers Parsing Yannis Smaragdakis, U. Athens (original slides by Sam Guyer@Tufts) Next step text chars Lexical analyzer tokens Parser IR Errors Parsing: Organize tokens into sentences Do tokens conform

More information

CS2210: Compiler Construction Syntax Analysis Syntax Analysis

CS2210: Compiler Construction Syntax Analysis Syntax Analysis Comparison with Lexical Analysis The second phase of compilation Phase Input Output Lexer string of characters string of tokens Parser string of tokens Parse tree/ast What Parse Tree? CS2210: Compiler

More information

COP4020 Programming Languages. Syntax Prof. Robert van Engelen

COP4020 Programming Languages. Syntax Prof. Robert van Engelen COP4020 Programming Languages Syntax Prof. Robert van Engelen Overview n Tokens and regular expressions n Syntax and context-free grammars n Grammar derivations n More about parse trees n Top-down and

More information

Syntactic Analysis. Top-Down Parsing

Syntactic Analysis. Top-Down Parsing Syntactic Analysis Top-Down Parsing Copyright 2017, Pedro C. Diniz, all rights reserved. Students enrolled in Compilers class at University of Southern California (USC) have explicit permission to make

More information

LR Parsing - The Items

LR Parsing - The Items LR Parsing - The Items Lecture 10 Sections 4.5, 4.7 Robb T. Koether Hampden-Sydney College Fri, Feb 13, 2015 Robb T. Koether (Hampden-Sydney College) LR Parsing - The Items Fri, Feb 13, 2015 1 / 31 1 LR

More information

Gujarat Technological University Sankalchand Patel College of Engineering, Visnagar B.E. Semester VII (CE) July-Nov Compiler Design (170701)

Gujarat Technological University Sankalchand Patel College of Engineering, Visnagar B.E. Semester VII (CE) July-Nov Compiler Design (170701) Gujarat Technological University Sankalchand Patel College of Engineering, Visnagar B.E. Semester VII (CE) July-Nov 2014 Compiler Design (170701) Question Bank / Assignment Unit 1: INTRODUCTION TO COMPILING

More information

Top-Down Parsing and Intro to Bottom-Up Parsing. Lecture 7

Top-Down Parsing and Intro to Bottom-Up Parsing. Lecture 7 Top-Down Parsing and Intro to Bottom-Up Parsing Lecture 7 1 Predictive Parsers Like recursive-descent but parser can predict which production to use Predictive parsers are never wrong Always able to guess

More information

DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY / COMPUTER SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING UNIT -1-INTRODUCTION TO COMPILERS 2 MARK QUESTIONS

DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY / COMPUTER SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING UNIT -1-INTRODUCTION TO COMPILERS 2 MARK QUESTIONS BHARATHIDASAN ENGINEERING COLLEGE DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY / COMPUTER SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING Year & Semester : III & VI Degree & Branch : B.E (CSE) /B.Tech (Information Technology) Subject

More information

EDAN65: Compilers, Lecture 06 A LR parsing. Görel Hedin Revised:

EDAN65: Compilers, Lecture 06 A LR parsing. Görel Hedin Revised: EDAN65: Compilers, Lecture 06 A LR parsing Görel Hedin Revised: 2017-09-11 This lecture Regular expressions Context-free grammar Attribute grammar Lexical analyzer (scanner) Syntactic analyzer (parser)

More information

VALLIAMMAI ENGNIEERING COLLEGE SRM Nagar, Kattankulathur

VALLIAMMAI ENGNIEERING COLLEGE SRM Nagar, Kattankulathur VALLIAMMAI ENGNIEERING COLLEGE SRM Nagar, Kattankulathur 603203. DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING Year & Semester : III & VI Section : CSE 1 & 2 Subject Code : CS6660 Subject Name : COMPILER

More information

Chapter 3. Parsing #1

Chapter 3. Parsing #1 Chapter 3 Parsing #1 Parser source file get next character scanner get token parser AST token A parser recognizes sequences of tokens according to some grammar and generates Abstract Syntax Trees (ASTs)

More information

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE & ENGINEERING Subject Name: CS2352 Principles of Compiler Design Year/Sem : III/VI

DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE & ENGINEERING Subject Name: CS2352 Principles of Compiler Design Year/Sem : III/VI DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE & ENGINEERING Subject Name: CS2352 Principles of Compiler Design Year/Sem : III/VI UNIT I - LEXICAL ANALYSIS 1. What is the role of Lexical Analyzer? [NOV 2014] 2. Write

More information

Bottom-Up Parsing. Lecture 11-12

Bottom-Up Parsing. Lecture 11-12 Bottom-Up Parsing Lecture 11-12 (From slides by G. Necula & R. Bodik) 9/22/06 Prof. Hilfinger CS164 Lecture 11 1 Bottom-Up Parsing Bottom-up parsing is more general than topdown parsing And just as efficient

More information

Part 3. Syntax analysis. Syntax analysis 96

Part 3. Syntax analysis. Syntax analysis 96 Part 3 Syntax analysis Syntax analysis 96 Outline 1. Introduction 2. Context-free grammar 3. Top-down parsing 4. Bottom-up parsing 5. Conclusion and some practical considerations Syntax analysis 97 Structure

More information

Outline. 1 Introduction. 2 Context-free Grammars and Languages. 3 Top-down Deterministic Parsing. 4 Bottom-up Deterministic Parsing

Outline. 1 Introduction. 2 Context-free Grammars and Languages. 3 Top-down Deterministic Parsing. 4 Bottom-up Deterministic Parsing Parsing 1 / 90 Outline 1 Introduction 2 Context-free Grammars and Languages 3 Top-down Deterministic Parsing 4 Bottom-up Deterministic Parsing 5 Parser Generation Using JavaCC 2 / 90 Introduction Once

More information

Question Bank. 10CS63:Compiler Design

Question Bank. 10CS63:Compiler Design Question Bank 10CS63:Compiler Design 1.Determine whether the following regular expressions define the same language? (ab)* and a*b* 2.List the properties of an operator grammar 3. Is macro processing a

More information

Syntax Analysis. Prof. James L. Frankel Harvard University. Version of 6:43 PM 6-Feb-2018 Copyright 2018, 2015 James L. Frankel. All rights reserved.

Syntax Analysis. Prof. James L. Frankel Harvard University. Version of 6:43 PM 6-Feb-2018 Copyright 2018, 2015 James L. Frankel. All rights reserved. Syntax Analysis Prof. James L. Frankel Harvard University Version of 6:43 PM 6-Feb-2018 Copyright 2018, 2015 James L. Frankel. All rights reserved. Context-Free Grammar (CFG) terminals non-terminals start

More information

CS415 Compilers. Syntax Analysis. These slides are based on slides copyrighted by Keith Cooper, Ken Kennedy & Linda Torczon at Rice University

CS415 Compilers. Syntax Analysis. These slides are based on slides copyrighted by Keith Cooper, Ken Kennedy & Linda Torczon at Rice University CS415 Compilers Syntax Analysis These slides are based on slides copyrighted by Keith Cooper, Ken Kennedy & Linda Torczon at Rice University Limits of Regular Languages Advantages of Regular Expressions

More information

Top-Down Parsing and Intro to Bottom-Up Parsing. Lecture 7

Top-Down Parsing and Intro to Bottom-Up Parsing. Lecture 7 Top-Down Parsing and Intro to Bottom-Up Parsing Lecture 7 1 Predictive Parsers Like recursive-descent but parser can predict which production to use Predictive parsers are never wrong Always able to guess

More information

Compiler Design 1. Top-Down Parsing. Goutam Biswas. Lect 5

Compiler Design 1. Top-Down Parsing. Goutam Biswas. Lect 5 Compiler Design 1 Top-Down Parsing Compiler Design 2 Non-terminal as a Function In a top-down parser a non-terminal may be viewed as a generator of a substring of the input. We may view a non-terminal

More information

Introduction to Syntax Analysis

Introduction to Syntax Analysis Compiler Design 1 Introduction to Syntax Analysis Compiler Design 2 Syntax Analysis The syntactic or the structural correctness of a program is checked during the syntax analysis phase of compilation.

More information