Talk:Recursive descent parser

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article was originally based on material from the Free On-line Dictionary of Computing, which is licensed under the GFDL.

This page really needs a discussion of the problem of left-recursive grammar rules. Such rules are extremely common, as for example

EXPR = INT | EXPR + EXPR | EXPR * EXPR;

A recursive descent parser, presented with this grammar, will loop forever on a malformed input.

Should probably mention that hand-written recursive descent parsers are usually based on EBNF grammars? These support left-recursion by turning

    A = A b C | C

into

    A = C (b C)*

Paolo Bonzini, 09:34, 8 Mar 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Recursive descent parser example

Dominus 04:44, 28 Aug 2003 (UTC)

The code on the page is wrong. Parse_E will parse the string NOTTRUETRUE which is not part of the language.

I don't think it does. Care to demonstrate? -- Jan Hidders 11:22, 28 Aug 2003 (UTC)
maybe the problem is hidden behind the if's, which should be else-if's??
Ah, yes, of course. Hope I fixed that now. -- Jan Hidders 00:51, 4 Nov 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Does it accept 1*-1? I'm not sure it does

Does not look like it accepts this:
// ident := number * - number .

Correct.

Symbol symbols[7] = {ident,becomes,number,times,minus,number,period};
Should it?

The parser is based on the [PL/0] grammar (a compiler used in many compiler construction courses), which is in turn based on Pascal. For reasons unknown to me, standard Pascal does not allow imbedded unary expressions. For instance:
ident := -ident * number;
is allowed, however, expressions such as yours are not.
To allow this, you could add "-|+" to the factor production, as in:
factor = 
         ident 
       | ("+"|"-") factor
       | number 
       | "(" expression ")"
And change the parser appropriately.
Since the [PL/0] grammar is so well known, I'm of the opinion that the grammar should be left as is. 68.219.72.181 13:47, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Question about See Also entry

There is a new See Also entry that I have a question about.

It points to a 'source code' site (nothing wrong with that), but it doesn't seem to add very much. It is essentially the example, copied from this wikipedia site (without any notice of the copying, by the way), plus another simple example.

Should this link be deleted? 67.34.42.125 12:27, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] PEGs

I have removed references to parsing expression grammars in this discussion on recursive descent parsing, as the content referring to PEGs, at least as formulated, tended to give the impression that PEGs are a widely adopted formalism. Parsing expression grammars, while analytic, are a formal grammar, and RD parsing is a parsing strategy (algorithm). QTJ 04:36, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bug in the parser code

The code inside block(), after "while (accept(procsym))" seems to be nonsense, right? There are 2 nested while-loops and as far as i understand the grammar only the outer one should be there. Catskineater (talk) 17:28, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] SML example

I just wrote one of these in SML for an assignment. Should I post it here under Implementation in functional languages? bkhl (talk) 07:47, 13 May 2008 (UTC)