Re: Is LL(k) LL(1) ?

corbett@lupa.Eng.Sun.COM (Robert Corbett)
4 May 1998 23:00:03 -0400

From comp.compilers

Related articles
Is LL(k) LL(1) ? feedME!minotoko@uunet.uu.net (1998-04-15)
Re: Is LL(k) LL(1) ? will@ccs.neu.edu (William D Clinger) (1998-04-29)
*Re: Is LL(k) LL(1) ? corbett@lupa.Eng.Sun.COM* (1998-05-04)**
Re: Is LL(k) LL(1) ? torbenm@diku.dk (Torben Mogensen) (1998-05-07)
Re: Is LL(k) LL(1) ? jhf@lanl.gov (Joseph H. Fasel) (1998-05-12)

| List of all articles for this month |

From:	corbett@lupa.Eng.Sun.COM (Robert Corbett)
Newsgroups:	comp.compilers
Date:	4 May 1998 23:00:03 -0400
Organization:	Sun Microsystems Computer Corporation
References:	98-04-065 98-04-107
Keywords:	LL(1), theory

>> Can any LL(k) grammar be transformed into an LL(1) one ?
>
>No:

Any programming language that contains the dangling-else construct
is not LL(k) for any k.

Sincerely,
Bob Corbett

--

Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.