# UNIT-III BOTTOM-UP PARSING

Size: px
Start display at page:

Transcription

1 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 parser. Shift- Reduce Parsing Shift-reduce parsing is a type of bottom-up parsing that attempts to construct a parse tree for an input string beginning at the leaves (the bottom) and working up towards the root (the top). Example: Consider the grammar: S aabe A Abc b B d The sentence to be recognized is abbcde. REDUCTION (LEFTMOST) RIGHTMOST DERIVATION abbcde (A b) S aabe aabcde (A Abc) aade aade (B d) aabcde aabe (S aabe) abbcde S The reductions trace out the right-most derivation in reverse. Handles: A handle of a string is a substring that matches the right side of a production, and whose reduction to the non-terminal on the left side of the production represents one step along the reverse of a rightmost derivation. Example: Consider the grammar: E E+E E E*E E (E) E id And the input string id1+id2*id3 The rightmost derivation is : E E+E E+E*E E+E*id3 E+id2*id3 id1+id2*id3 In the above derivation the underlined substrings are called handles.

2 Handle pruning: A rightmost derivation in reverse can be obtained by handle pruning. (i.e.) if w is a sentence or string of the grammar at hand, then w = γn, where γn is the n th rightsentinel form of some rightmost derivation. Stack implementation of shift-reduce parsing : Stack Input Action \$ id1+id2*id3 \$ shift \$ id1 +id2*id3 \$ reduce by E id \$ E +id2*id3 \$ shift \$ E+ id2*id3 \$ shift \$ E+id2 *id3 \$ reduce by E id \$ E+E *id3 \$ shift \$ E+E* id3 \$ shift \$ E+E*id3 \$ reduce by E id \$ E+E*E \$ reduce by E E *E \$ E+E \$ reduce by E E+E \$ E \$ accept Actions in shift-reduce parser: shift The next input symbol is shifted onto the top of the stack. reduce The parser replaces the handle within a stack with a non-terminal. accept The parser announces successful completion of parsing. error The parser discovers that a syntax error has occurred and calls an error recovery routine. Conflicts in shift-reduce parsing: There are two conflicts that occur in shift shift-reduce parsing: 1. Shift-reduce conflict: The parser cannot decide whether to shift or to reduce. 2. Reduce-reduce conflict: The parser cannot decide which of several reductions to make.

3 1. Shift-reduce conflict: Example: Consider the grammar: E E+E E*E id and input id+id*id Stack Input Action Stack Input Action \$ E+E *id \$ Reduce by \$E+E *id \$ Shift E E+E \$ E *id \$ Shift \$E+E* id \$ Shift \$ E* id \$ Shift \$E+E*id \$ Reduce by E id \$ E*id \$ Reduce by \$E+E*E \$ Reduce by E id E E*E \$ E*E \$ Reduce by \$E+E \$ Reduce by E E*E E E*E \$ E \$E 2. Reduce-reduce conflict: Consider the grammar: M R+R R+c R R c and input c+c Stack Input Action Stack Input Action \$ c+c \$ Shift \$ c+c \$ Shift \$ c +c \$ Reduce by \$ c +c \$ Reduce by R c R c \$ R +c \$ Shift \$ R +c \$ Shift \$ R+ c \$ Shift \$ R+ c \$ Shift \$ R+c \$ Reduce by \$ R+c \$ Reduce by R c M R+c \$ R+R \$ Reduce by \$ M \$ M R+R \$ M \$

4 Viable prefixes: α is a viable prefix of the grammar if there is w such that αw is a right sentinel form. The set of prefixes of right sentinel forms that can appear on the stack of a shift-reduce parser are called viable prefixes. The set of viable prefixes is a regular language. OPERATOR-PRECEDENCE PARSING An efficient way of constructing shift-reduce parser is called operator-precedence parsing. Operator precedence parser can be constructed from a grammar called Operator-grammar. These grammars have the property that no production on right side is ɛ or has two adjacent non-terminals. Example: Consider the grammar: E EAE (E) -E id A + - * / Since the right side EAE has three consecutive non-terminals, the grammar can be written as follows: E E+E E-E E*E E/E E E -E id Operator precedence relations: There are three disjoint precedence relations namely <. - less than =. - equal to. > - greater than The relations give the following meaning: a <. b a yields precedence to b a = b a has the same precedence as b a. > b a takes precedence over b Rules for binary operations: 1. If operator θ1 has higher precedence than operator θ2, then make θ1. > θ2 and θ2 <. θ1 2. If operators θ1 and θ2, are of equal precedence, then make θ1. > θ2 and θ2. > θ1 if operators are left associative θ1 <. θ2 and θ2 <. θ1 if right associative 3. Make the following for all operators θ: θ <. id, id. > θ θ <. (, ( <. θ Also make ). > θ, θ. > ) θ. > \$, \$ <. θ ( = ), ( <. (, ). > ), ( <. id, id. > ), \$ <. id, id. > \$, \$ <. (, ). > \$

5 Example: Operator-precedence relations for the grammar E E+E E-E E*E E/E E E (E) -E id is given in the following table assuming 1. is of highest precedence and right-associative 2. * and / are of next higher precedence and left-associative, and 3. + and - are of lowest precedence and left-associative Note that the blanks in the table denote error entries. TABLE : Operator-precedence relations + - * / id ( ) \$ +.>.> <. <. <. <. <.. >.> -.>.> <. <. <. <. <.. >.> *.>.>.>.> <. <. <..>.> /.>.>.>.> <. <. <.. >.>..... > > > > < <. <... > > id.>.>.>.>. >.>.> ( <. <. <. <. <. <. <. = ).>.>.>.>.>.>.> \$ <. <. <. <. <. <. <. Operator precedence parsing algorithm: Input : An input string w and a table of precedence relations. Output : If w is well formed, a skeletal parse tree,with a placeholder non-terminal E labeling all interior nodes; otherwise, an error indication. Method : Initially the stack contains \$ and the input buffer the string w \$. To parse, we execute the following program : (1) Set ip to point to the first symbol of w\$; (2) repeat forever (3) if \$ is on top of the stack and ip points to \$ then (4) return else begin (5) let a be the topmost terminal symbol on the stack and let b be the symbol pointed to by ip; (6) if a <. b or a = b then begin (7) push b onto the stack; (8) advance ip to the next input symbol; end; (9) else if a. > b then /*reduce*/ (10) repeat (11) pop the stack (12) until the top stack terminal is related by <. to the terminal most recently opped (13) else error( ) end

6 Stack implementation of operator precedence parsing: Operator precedence parsing uses a stack and precedence relation table for its implementation of above algorithm. It is a shift-reduce parsing containing all four actions shift, reduce, accept and error. The initial configuration of an operator precedence parsing is STACK \$ where w is the input string to be parsed. Example: Consider the grammar E E+E E-E E*E E/E E E (E) id. Input string is id+id*id.the implementation is as follows: STACK INPUT COMMENT \$ < id+id*id \$ shift id \$ id > +id*id \$ pop the top of the stack id \$ < +id*id \$ shift + \$ + < id*id \$ shift id \$ +id > *id \$ pop id \$ + < *id \$ shift * \$ + * < id \$ shift id \$ + * id > \$ pop id \$ + * > \$ pop * \$ + > \$ pop + \$ \$ accept Advantages of operator precedence parsing: 1. It is easy to implement. 2. Once an operator precedence relation is made between all pairs of terminals of a grammar, the grammar can be ignored. The grammar is not referred anymore during implementation. Disadvantages of operator precedence parsing: 1. It is hard to handle tokens like the minus sign (-) which has two different precedence. 2. Only a small class of grammar can be parsed using operator-precedence parser.

7 LR PARSERS An efficient bottom-up syntax analysis technique that can be used to parse a large class of CFG is called LR(k) parsing. The L is for left-to-right scanning of the input, the R for constructing a rightmost derivation in reverse, and the k for the number of input symbols. When k is omitted, it is assumed to be 1. Advantages of LR parsing: It recognizes virtually all programming language constructs for which CFG can be written. It is an efficient non-backtracking shift-reduce parsing method. A grammar that can be parsed using LR method is a proper superset of a grammar that can be parsed with predictive parser. It detects a syntactic error as soon as possible. Drawbacks of LR method: It is too much of work to construct a LR parser by hand for a programming language grammar. A specialized tool, called a LR parser generator, is needed. Example: YACC. Types of LR parsing method: 1. SLR- Simple LR Easiest to implement, least powerful. 2. CLR- Canonical LR Most powerful, most expensive. 3. LALR- Look-Ahead LR Intermediate in size and cost between the other two methods. The LR parsing algorithm: The schematic form of an LR parser is as follows: INPUT a1 ai an \$ Sm LR parsing program OUTPUT Xm Sm-1 Xm-1 action goto S0 STACK

8 It consists of : an input, an output, a stack, a driver program, and a parsing table that has two parts (action and goto). The driver program is the same for all LR parser. The parsing program reads characters from an input buffer one at a time. The program uses a stack to store a string of the form s0x1s1x2s2 Xmsm, where sm is on top. Each Xi is a grammar symbol and each si is a state. The parsing table consists of two parts : action and goto functions. Action : The parsing program determines sm, the state currently on top of stack, and ai, the current input symbol. It then consults action[sm,ai] in the action table which can have one of four values : 1. shift s, where s is a state, 2. reduce by a grammar production A β, 3. accept, and 4. error. Goto : The function goto takes a state and grammar symbol as arguments and produces a state. LR Parsing algorithm: Input: An input string w and an LR parsing table with functions action and goto for grammar G. Output: If w is in L(G), a bottom-up-parse for w; otherwise, an error indication. Method: Initially, the parser has s0 on its stack, where s0 is the initial state, and w\$ in the input buffer. The parser then executes the following program : set ip to point to the first input symbol of w\$; repeat forever begin let s be the state on top of the stack and a the symbol pointed to by ip; if action[s, a] = shift s then begin push a then s on top of the stack; advance ip to the next input symbol end else if action[s, a] = reduce A β then begin pop 2* β symbols off the stack; let s be the state now on top of the stack; push A then goto[s, A] on top of the stack; output the production A β end else if action[s, a] = accept then return else error( ) end

9 CONSTRUCTING SLR(1) PARSING TABLE: To perform SLR parsing, take grammar as input and do the following: 1. Find LR(0) items. 2. Completing the closure. 3. Compute goto(i,x), where, I is set of items and X is grammar symbol. LR(0) items: An LR(0) item of a grammar G is a production of G with a dot at some position of the right side. For example, production A XYZ yields the four items : A. XYZ A X. YZ A XY. Z A XYZ. Closure operation: If I is a set of items for a grammar G, then closure(i) is the set of items constructed from I by the two rules: 1. Initially, every item in I is added to closure(i). 2. If A α. Bβ is in closure(i) and B γ is a production, then add the item B. γ to I, if it is not already there. We apply this rule until no more new items can be added to closure(i). Goto operation: Goto(I, X) is defined to be the closure of the set of all items [A αx. β] such that [A α. Xβ] is in I. Steps to construct SLR parsing table for grammar G are: 1. Augment G and produce G 2. Construct the canonical collection of set of items C for G 3. Construct the parsing action function action and goto using the following algorithm that requires FOLLOW(A) for each non-terminal of grammar. Algorithm for construction of SLR parsing table: Input : An augmented grammar G Output : The SLR parsing table functions action and goto for G Method : 1. Construct C = {I0, I1,. In}, the collection of sets of LR(0) items for G. 2. State i is constructed from Ii.. The parsing functions for state i are determined as follows: (a) If [A α aβ] is in Ii and goto(ii,a) = Ij, then set action[i,a] to shift j. Here a must be terminal. (b) If [A α ] is in Ii, then set action[i,a] to reduce A α for all a in FOLLOW(A). (c) If [S S.] is in Ii, then set action[i,\$] to accept. If any conflicting actions are generated by the above rules, we say grammar is not SLR(1).

10 3. The goto transitions for state i are constructed for all non-terminals A using the rule: If goto(ii,a) = Ij, then goto[i,a] = j. 4. All entries not defined by rules (2) and (3) are made error 5. The initial state of the parser is the one constructed from the set of items containing [S.S]. Example for SLR parsing: Construct SLR parsing for the following grammar : G : E E + T T T T * F F F (E) id The given grammar is : G : E E + T (1) E T (2) T T * F (3) T F (4) F (E) (5) F id (6) Step 1 : Convert given grammar into augmented grammar. Augmented grammar: E E E E + T E T T T * F T F F (E) F id Step 2 : Find LR (0) items. I0 : E. E E. E + T E. T T. T * F T. F F. (E) F. id GOTO ( I0, E) GOTO ( I4, id ) I1 : E E. I5 : F id. E E. + T

11 GOTO ( I0, T) I2 : E T. T T. * F GOTO ( I0, F) I3 : T F. GOTO ( I0, ( ) I4 : F (. E) E. E + T E. T T. T * F T. F F. (E) F. id GOTO ( I0, id ) I5 : F id. GOTO ( I1, + ) I6 : E E +. T T. T * F T. F F. (E) F. id GOTO ( I2, * ) I7 : T T *. F F. (E) F. id GOTO ( I4, E ) I8 : F ( E. ) E E. + T GOTO ( I4, T) I2 : E T. T T. * F GOTO ( I4, F) I3 : T F. GOTO ( I6, T ) I9 : E E + T. T T. * F GOTO ( I6, F ) I3 : T F. GOTO ( I6, ( ) I4 : F (. E ) GOTO ( I6, id) I5 : F id. GOTO ( I7, F ) I10 : T T * F. GOTO ( I7, ( ) I4 : F (. E ) E. E + T E. T T. T * F T. F F. (E) F. id GOTO ( I7, id ) I5 : F id. GOTO ( I8, ) ) I11 : F ( E ). GOTO ( I8, + ) I6 : E E +. T T. T * F T. F F. ( E ) F. id GOTO ( I9, *) I7 : T T *. F F. ( E ) F. id

12 GOTO ( I4, ( ) I4 : F (. E) E. E + T E. T T. T * F T. F F. (E) F id FOLLOW (E) = { \$, ), +) FOLLOW (T) = { \$, +, ), * } FOOLOW (F) = { *, +, ), \$ } SLR parsing table: ACTION GOTO id + * ( ) \$ E T F I0 s5 s I1 s6 ACC I2 r2 s7 r2 r2 I3 r4 r4 r4 r4 I4 s5 s I5 r6 r6 r6 r6 I6 s5 s4 9 3 I7 s5 s4 10 I8 s6 s11 I9 r1 s7 r1 r1 I10 r3 r3 r3 r3 I11 r5 r5 r5 r5

13 Blank entries are error entries. Stack implementation: Check whether the input (id + id) * id is valid or not. Canonical LR (1) Parsing Various steps involved in the CLR (1) Parsing: 1. Write the Context free Grammar for the given input string 2. Check for the Ambiguity 3. Add Augment production 4. Create Canonical collection of LR ( 1 ) items 5. Draw DFA 6. Construct the CLR ( 1 ) Parsing table 7. Based on the information from the Table, with help of Stack and parsing algorithm generate the output.

14 LR (1) item The LR (1) item is defined by production, position of data and a terminal symbol. The terminal is called as look ahead symbol. General form of LR (1) item is S->α Aβ, \$ A->., FIRST(,\$) Rules to create canonical collection: 1. Every element of I is added to closure of I 2. If an LR (1) item [X-> A BC, a] exists in I, and there exists a production B- >b1b2.., then add item [B-> b1b2, z] where z is a terminal in FIRST(Ca), if it is not already in Closure(I).keep applying this rule until there are no more elements adde. Ex: if the Grammar is S->C C->cC C->d Canonical collection of LR (1) items can be created as follows: 0 S`-> S (Augment Production) 1 S-> CC 2 C-> cc 3 C-> d I0 State: is \$. Add Augment production and compute the Closure, the look ahead symbol for the Augment Production S`-> S, \$= Closure(S`-> S, \$) The dot symbol is followed by a Non terminal S. So, add productions starting with S in I0 State. S-> CC, FIRST (\$), using 2 nd rule S-> CC, \$ The dot symbol is followed by a Non terminal C. So, add productions starting with C in I0 State. C-> cc, FIRST(C, \$) C-> d, FIRST(C, \$) FIRST(C) = {c, d} so, the items are C-> cc, c/d C-> d, c/d

15 The dot symbol is followed by a terminal value. So, close the I0 State. So, the productions in the I0 are S`-> S, \$ S-> CC, \$ C-> cc, c/d C-> d, c/d I1 = Goto ( I0, S)= S`->S,\$ I2 = Go to (I 0, C)= Closure( S-> C C, \$) S-> C-> cc, \$ C-> d,\$ So, the I2 State is S->C C,\$ C-> cc, \$ C-> d,\$ I3= Goto(I0,c)= Closure( C->c C, c/d) C-> cc, c/d C-> d, c/d So, the I3 State is C->c C, c/d C-> cc, c/d C-> d, c/d I4= Goto( I0, d)= Colsure( C->d, c/d) = C->d, c/d I5 = Goto ( I2, C)= closure(s->cc,\$)= S->CC, \$ I6= Goto ( I2, c)= closure(c->c C, \$)= C-> cc, \$ C-> d, \$ S0, the I6 State is C->c C, \$ C-> cc, \$ C-> d,\$ I7 = Go to (I 2, d)= Closure(C->d,\$ ) = C->d, \$ Goto(I3, c)= closure(c-> cc, c/d)= I3. I8= Go to (I 3, C)= Closure(C->cC, c/d) = C->cC, c/d Go to (I3, c)= Closure(C->c C, c/d) = I3 Go to (I3, d)= Closure(C->d, c/d) = I4 I9= Go to (I 6, C)= Closure(C->cC, \$) = C->cC, \$ Go to (I6, c)= Closure(C->c C, \$) = I6 Go to (I6, d)= Closure(C->d,\$ ) = I7

16 Drawing DFA for the above LR (1) items S`->S,\$ S->CC, \$ S I1 C I5 C->cC, \$ C 0 S`-> S, \$ 1 S-> CC, \$ 2C- > cc,c/d 3 C-> d C S->C C,\$ C-> cc, \$ C-> d,\$ c C->c C, \$ C-> cc, \$ C-> d,\$ I2 I6 I7 d c I6 I9 I0 c d d C->d, c/d C->c C, c/d C-> cc, c/d C-> d, c/d C C->d, \$ I7 I4 d I3 c C->cC, I4 I3 c/d I8

17 Construction of CLR (1) Table Rule1: if there is an item [A->α Xβ,b] in Ii and goto(ii,x) is in Ij then action [Ii][X]= Shift j, Where X is Terminal. Rule2: if there is an item [A->α, b] in Ii and (A S`) set action [Ii][b]= reduce along with the production number. Rule3: if there is an item [S`->S, \$] in Ii then set action [Ii][\$]= Accept. Rule4: if there is an item [A->α Xβ,b] in Ii and go to(ii,x) is in Ij then goto [Ii][X]= j, Where X is Non Terminal. States ACTION GOTO c D \$ S C I0 S3 S4 1 2 I1 ACCEPT I2 S6 S7 5 I3 S3 S4 8 I4 R3 R3 5 I5 R1 I6 S6 S7 9 I7 R3 I8 R2 R2 I9 R2 LR (1) Table LALR (1) Parsing The CLR Parser avoids the conflicts in the parse table. But it produces more number of States when compared to SLR parser. Hence more space is occupied by the table in the memory. So LALR parsing can be used. Here, the tables obtained are smaller than CLR parse table. But, it is also as efficient as CLR parser. Here LR (1) items that have same productions but different look-aheads are combined to form a single set of items.

18 For example, consider the grammar in the previous example. Consider the states I4 and I7 as given below: I4= Goto( I0, d)= Colsure( C->d, c/d) = C->d, c/d I7 = Go to (I 2, d)= Closure(C->d,\$ ) = C->d, \$ These states are differing only in the look-aheads. They have the same productions. Hence these states are combined to form a single state called as I47. Similarly the states I3 and I6 differing only in their look-aheads as given below: I3= Goto(I0,c)= C->c C, c/d C-> cc, c/d C-> d, c/d I6= Goto ( I2, c)= C->c C, \$ C-> cc, \$ C-> d,\$ These states are differing only in the look-aheads. They have the same productions. Hence these states are combined to form a single state called as I36. the state I89. Similarly the States I8 and I9 differing only in look-aheads. Hence they combined to form States ACTION GOTO c D \$ S C I0 S 36 S I1 ACCEPT I2 S 36 S 47 5 I 36 S 36 S I 47 R3 R3 R3 5 I5 R1 I 89 R2 R2 R2 LALR Table

19 Conflicts in the CLR (1) Parsing When, multiple entries occur in the table. Then, the situation is said to be a Conflict. Shift-Reduce Conflict in CLR (1) Parsing Shift Reduce Conflict in the CLR (1) parsing occurs when a state has 3. A Reduced item of the form A α, a and 4. An incomplete item of the form A β aα as shown below: 1 A-> β a α, \$ a 2 B->b,a Ii Ij States Action GOTO a \$ A B I i Sj/r2 Reduce - Reduce Conflict in CLR (1) Parsing Reduce- Reduce Conflict in the CLR (1) parsing occurs when a state has two or more reduced items of the form 3. A α 4. B ȕ If two productions in a state (I) reducing on same look ahead symbol as shown below: 1 A-> α,a 2 B->β,a States Action GOTO a \$ A B I i r 1/r2 Ii

20 String Acceptance using LR Parsing: Consider the above example, if the input String is cdd States ACTION GOTO c D \$ S C I0 S3 S4 1 2 I1 ACCEPT I2 S6 S7 5 I3 S3 S4 8 I4 R3 R3 5 I5 R1 I6 S6 S7 9 I7 I8 R2 R2 I9 0 S`-> S (Augment Production) 1 S-> CC 2 C-> cc 3 C-> d R3 R2 STACK INPUT ACTION \$0 cdd\$ Shift S3 \$0c3 dd\$ Shift S4 \$0c3d4 d\$ Reduce with R3,C->d, pop 2*β symbols from the stack \$0c3C d\$ Goto ( I3, C)=8Shift S6 \$0c3C8 d\$ Reduce with R2,C->cC, pop 2*β symbols from the stack \$0C d\$ Goto ( I0, C)=2 \$0C2 d\$ Shift S7 \$0C2d7 \$ Reduce with R3,C->d, pop 2*β symbols from the stack \$0C2C \$ Goto ( I2, C)=5 \$0C2C5 \$ Reduce with R1,S->CC, pop 2*β symbols from the stack \$0S \$ Goto ( I0, S)=1 \$0S1 \$ Accept

21 LL Parsers vs LR Parsers: LL does a leftmost derivation, LR does a rightmost derivation. LL starts with only the root nonterminal on the stack, LR ends with only the root nonterminal on the stack. LL ends when the stack is empty. But, LR starts with an empty stack. LL uses the stack for designating what is still to be expected, LR uses the stack for designating what is already seen. LL builds the parse tree top down. But, LR builds the parse tree bottom up. LL continuously pops a nonterminal off the stack, and pushes a corresponding right hand side. But, LR tries to recognize a right hand side on the stack, pops it, and pushes the corresponding nonterminal. LL thus expands nonterminal, while LR reduces them. LL reads terminal when it pops one off the stack, LR reads terminals while it pushes them on the stack. LL uses grammar rules in an order which corresponds to pre-order traversal of the parse tree, LR does a post-order traversal.

### 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

### 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

### 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

### 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/

### 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

### 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

### 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

### 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

### 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

### 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

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

### 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,

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:

### 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

### 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

### 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

### 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

### 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

### 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

### 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,

### 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.

### 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

### 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

### 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

### 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

### 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

### 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.

### 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

### 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

### Bottom Up Parsing. Shift and Reduce. Sentential Form. Handle. Parse Tree. Bottom Up Parsing 9/26/2012. Also known as Shift-Reduce parsing

Also known as Shift-Reduce parsing More powerful than top down Don t need left factored grammars Can handle left recursion Attempt to construct parse tree from an input string eginning at leaves and working

### 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

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.

### 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/

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

### CS308 Compiler Principles Syntax Analyzer Li Jiang

CS308 Syntax Analyzer Li Jiang Department of Computer Science and Engineering Shanghai Jiao Tong University Syntax Analyzer Syntax Analyzer creates the syntactic structure of the given source program.

### 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

### CS 4120 Introduction to Compilers

CS 4120 Introduction to Compilers Andrew Myers Cornell University Lecture 6: Bottom-Up Parsing 9/9/09 Bottom-up parsing A more powerful parsing technology LR grammars -- more expressive than LL can handle

### Lecture Bottom-Up Parsing

Lecture 14+15 Bottom-Up Parsing CS 241: Foundations of Sequential Programs Winter 2018 Troy Vasiga et al University of Waterloo 1 Example CFG 1. S S 2. S AyB 3. A ab 4. A cd 5. B z 6. B wz 2 Stacks in

### 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

### CS 2210 Sample Midterm. 1. Determine if each of the following claims is true (T) or false (F).

CS 2210 Sample Midterm 1. Determine if each of the following claims is true (T) or false (F). F A language consists of a set of strings, its grammar structure, and a set of operations. (Note: a language

### 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

### 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

### 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

### SLR parsers. LR(0) items

SLR parsers LR(0) items As we have seen, in order to make shift-reduce parsing practical, we need a reasonable way to identify viable prefixes (and so, possible handles). Up to now, it has not been clear

### Compilers. Bottom-up Parsing. (original slides by Sam

Compilers Bottom-up Parsing Yannis Smaragdakis U Athens Yannis Smaragdakis, U. Athens (original slides by Sam Guyer@Tufts) Bottom-Up Parsing More general than top-down parsing And just as efficient Builds

### 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 ----

### 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

### Chapter 4. Lexical and Syntax Analysis. Topics. Compilation. Language Implementation. Issues in Lexical and Syntax Analysis.

Topics Chapter 4 Lexical and Syntax Analysis Introduction Lexical Analysis Syntax Analysis Recursive -Descent Parsing Bottom-Up parsing 2 Language Implementation Compilation There are three possible approaches

### 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

### 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)

### 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,

### Bottom up parsing. General idea LR(0) SLR LR(1) LALR To best exploit JavaCUP, should understand the theoretical basis (LR parsing);

Bottom up parsing General idea LR(0) SLR LR(1) LALR To best exploit JavaCUP, should understand the theoretical basis (LR parsing); 1 Top-down vs Bottom-up Bottom-up more powerful than top-down; Can process

### Bottom-Up Parsing II. Lecture 8

Bottom-Up Parsing II Lecture 8 1 Review: Shift-Reduce Parsing Bottom-up parsing uses two actions: Shift ABC xyz ABCx yz Reduce Cbxy ijk CbA ijk 2 Recall: he Stack Left string can be implemented by a stack

### Example CFG. Lectures 16 & 17 Bottom-Up Parsing. LL(1) Predictor Table Review. Stacks in LR Parsing 1. Sʹ " S. 2. S " AyB. 3. A " ab. 4.

Example CFG Lectures 16 & 17 Bottom-Up Parsing CS 241: Foundations of Sequential Programs Fall 2016 1. Sʹ " S 2. S " AyB 3. A " ab 4. A " cd Matt Crane University of Waterloo 5. B " z 6. B " wz 2 LL(1)

### Bottom-Up Parsing II (Different types of Shift-Reduce Conflicts) Lecture 10. Prof. Aiken (Modified by Professor Vijay Ganesh.

Bottom-Up Parsing II Different types of Shift-Reduce Conflicts) Lecture 10 Ganesh. Lecture 10) 1 Review: Bottom-Up Parsing Bottom-up parsing is more general than topdown parsing And just as efficient Doesn

### Simple LR (SLR) LR(0) Drawbacks LR(1) SLR Parse. LR(1) Start State and Reduce. LR(1) Items 10/3/2012

LR(0) Drawbacks Consider the unambiguous augmented grammar: 0.) S E \$ 1.) E T + E 2.) E T 3.) T x If we build the LR(0) DFA table, we find that there is a shift-reduce conflict. This arises because the

### 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

### 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

### 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

### 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

### 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

### 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

### 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

### Lexical and Syntax Analysis. Bottom-Up Parsing

Lexical and Syntax Analysis Bottom-Up Parsing Parsing There are two ways to construct derivation of a grammar. Top-Down: begin with start symbol; repeatedly replace an instance of a production s LHS with

### 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

### LANGUAGE PROCESSORS. Introduction to Language processor:

LANGUAGE PROCESSORS Introduction to Language processor: A program that performs task such as translating and interpreting required for processing a specified programming language. The different types of

### 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/

### 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

### 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

### How do LL(1) Parsers Build Syntax Trees?

How do LL(1) Parsers Build Syntax Trees? So far our LL(1) parser has acted like a recognizer. It verifies that input token are syntactically correct, but it produces no output. Building complete (concrete)

### 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

### 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

### Bottom-Up Parsing LR Parsing

Bottom-Up Parsing LR Parsing Maryam Siahbani 2/19/2016 1 What we need for LR parsing LR0) states: Describe all possible states in which parser can be Parsing table ransition between LR0) states Actions

### 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

### 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

### Review of CFGs and Parsing II Bottom-up Parsers. Lecture 5. Review slides 1

Review of CFGs and Parsing II Bottom-up Parsers Lecture 5 1 Outline Parser Overview op-down Parsers (Covered largely through labs) Bottom-up Parsers 2 he Functionality of the Parser Input: sequence of

### 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

### Lecture 8: Deterministic Bottom-Up Parsing

Lecture 8: Deterministic Bottom-Up Parsing (From slides by G. Necula & R. Bodik) Last modified: Fri Feb 12 13:02:57 2010 CS164: Lecture #8 1 Avoiding nondeterministic choice: LR We ve been looking at general

### 4. Lexical and Syntax Analysis

4. Lexical and Syntax Analysis 4.1 Introduction Language implementation systems must analyze source code, regardless of the specific implementation approach Nearly all syntax analysis is based on a formal

### 4. Lexical and Syntax Analysis

4. Lexical and Syntax Analysis 4.1 Introduction Language implementation systems must analyze source code, regardless of the specific implementation approach Nearly all syntax analysis is based on a formal

### Review: Shift-Reduce Parsing. Bottom-up parsing uses two actions: Bottom-Up Parsing II. Shift ABC xyz ABCx yz. Lecture 8. Reduce Cbxy ijk CbA ijk

Review: Shift-Reduce Parsing Bottom-up parsing uses two actions: Bottom-Up Parsing II Lecture 8 Shift ABC xyz ABCx yz Reduce Cbxy ijk CbA ijk Prof. Aiken CS 13 Lecture 8 1 Prof. Aiken CS 13 Lecture 8 2

### VETRI VINAYAHA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY

VETRI VINAYAHA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING CS6660 COMPILER DESIGN III year/ VI sem CSE (Regulation 2013) UNIT I -INTRODUCTION TO COMPILER PART A

### Lecture 7: Deterministic Bottom-Up Parsing

Lecture 7: Deterministic Bottom-Up Parsing (From slides by G. Necula & R. Bodik) Last modified: Tue Sep 20 12:50:42 2011 CS164: Lecture #7 1 Avoiding nondeterministic choice: LR We ve been looking at general

### Bottom-Up Parsing. Lecture 11-12

Bottom-Up Parsing Lecture 11-12 (From slides by G. Necula & R. Bodik) 2/20/08 Prof. Hilfinger CS164 Lecture 11 1 Administrivia Test I during class on 10 March. 2/20/08 Prof. Hilfinger CS164 Lecture 11

### 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

### 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

### CS606- compiler instruction Solved MCQS From Midterm Papers

CS606- compiler instruction Solved MCQS From Midterm Papers March 06,2014 MC100401285 Moaaz.pk@gmail.com Mc100401285@gmail.com PSMD01 Final Term MCQ s and Quizzes CS606- compiler instruction If X is a

### Chapter 4: LR Parsing

Chapter 4: LR Parsing 110 Some definitions Recall For a grammar G, with start symbol S, any string α such that S called a sentential form α is If α Vt, then α is called a sentence in L G Otherwise it is

### 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

### 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 ----

### LR Parsing LALR Parser Generators

LR Parsing LALR Parser Generators Outline Review of bottom-up parsing Computing the parsing DFA Using parser generators 2 Bottom-up Parsing (Review) A bottom-up parser rewrites the input string to the

### 컴파일러입문 제 6 장 구문분석

컴파일러입문 제 6 장 구문분석 목차 6.1 구문분석방법 6.2 구문분석기의출력 6.3 Top-down 방법 6.4 Bottom-up 방법 Syntax Analysis Page 2 구문분석방법 Text p.220 How to check whether an input string is a sentence of a grammar and how to construct

### 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)

### University of Technology Department of Computer Sciences. Final Examination st Term. Subject:Compilers Design

Subject:Compilers Design Division: All Branches Examiner:Dr. Abeer Tariq University of Technology Department of Computer Sciences 2102 Final Examination 2011-2012 1 st Term Year:Third Time: 3 Hours Date:

### 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

### Parsing III. CS434 Lecture 8 Spring 2005 Department of Computer Science University of Alabama Joel Jones

Parsing III (Top-down parsing: recursive descent & LL(1) ) (Bottom-up parsing) CS434 Lecture 8 Spring 2005 Department of Computer Science University of Alabama Joel Jones Copyright 2003, Keith D. Cooper,

### Unit 13. Compiler Design

Unit 13. Compiler Design Computers are a balanced mix of software and hardware. Hardware is just a piece of mechanical device and its functions are being controlled by a compatible software. Hardware understands

### LR(0) Parsing Summary. LR(0) Parsing Table. LR(0) Limitations. A Non-LR(0) Grammar. LR(0) Parsing Table CS412/CS413

LR(0) Parsing ummary C412/C41 Introduction to Compilers Tim Teitelbaum Lecture 10: LR Parsing February 12, 2007 LR(0) item = a production with a dot in RH LR(0) state = set of LR(0) items valid for viable