From cowan Sat Mar 6 22:46:20 2010 Subject: Re: LR(k) Lojban Grammar To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu (Lojban List) From: cowan Date: Mon, 4 Dec 1995 10:13:48 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <199512012218.RAA07090@locke.ccil.org> from "Carl D. Burke" at Dec 1, 95 04:08:24 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 773 Status: OR X-From-Space-Date: Mon Dec 4 10:13:48 1995 X-From-Space-Address: cowan Message-ID: karl. brk. cusku di'e > This assumes that lojban has an LR(k) grammar... I can't find the > reference right now, but the last I remember was that the grammar > was not actually completely context-free -- there were some shift-reduce > conflicts that YACC resolved using precedence of rules/productions. > If S-R or R-R conflicts exist, the language is not LR(1), regardless > of whether or not YACC can parse it; syntactic ambiguity exists, > it's just hidden by the mechanics of the parser. Lojban has 0 s/r, 0 r/r conflicts. The report that it had conflicts was due to a buggy YACC; six other YACCs of differing ancestries (Bison, several AT&T-based, Berkeley, Abraxas PCYACC) all reported no conflicts. -- John Cowan cowan@ccil.org e'osai ko sarji la lojban.