The disambiguation of the if-then-else operator isn't ok. The current implementation, which is the best I've been able to achieve without obfuscating the whole grammar, allows:
"s ; if s then s else s ; s"
"s + if s then s else s + s"
but not:
"s ; if s then s else s + s"
"s + if s then s else s ; s"
I've no idea how to solve this completely in an acceptable way. The solution in the "Disambiguation Filters For Scannerless Generalized LR Parsers" article is ambiguous as well.
Martin Bravenboer [2004-04-08 06:59]
The disambiguation of the if-then-else operator isn't ok. The current implementation, which is the best I've been able to achieve without obfuscating the whole grammar, allows:
"s ; if s then s else s ; s"
"s + if s then s else s + s"
but not:
"s ; if s then s else s + s"
"s + if s then s else s ; s"
I've no idea how to solve this completely in an acceptable way. The solution in the "Disambiguation Filters For Scannerless Generalized LR Parsers" article is ambiguous as well.
New Feature
Closed
Major
if-then-else operator
"s ; if s then s else s ; s"
"s + if s then s else s + s"
but not:
"s ; if s then s else s + s"
"s + if s then s else s ; s"
I've no idea how to solve this completely in an acceptable way. The solution in the "Disambiguation Filters For Scannerless Generalized LR Parsers" article is ambiguous as well.