yacc gurus

[Profetas]

Hi
I have been trying to add a mid-rule to my yacc grammar but I always get
shift and reduce conflicts

pel-0.0.3.y contains 12 shift/reduce conflicts and 12 reduce/reduce
conflicts.

does anobody know other way? I was using yacc and then I tried bison but
they are the same, I have done what is in the manual but there they have a
very limited mid-rule topic

Thanks The Prophet
__________________

[Rouben Rostamian]

In article <27******************************@localhost.talkab outprogramming.com>,
Profetas <xu*****@yahoo.com> wrote:

I have been trying to add a mid-rule to my yacc grammar but I always get
shift and reduce conflicts

You may get better results by asking this in comp.compilers.

--
rr

[Default User]

Profetas wrote:

Hi
I have been trying to add a mid-rule to my yacc grammar but I always get
shift and reduce conflicts

And this is a C question in what way?


Brian Rodenborn

[Profetas]

>And this is a C question in what way?
If you don't know the topic don't even reply, google it

[Keith Thompson]

"Profetas" <xu*****@yahoo.com> writes:

And this is a C question in what way?

If you don't know the topic don't even reply, google it

His point is that questions about yacc are off-topic here in
comp.lang.c.

Since yacc is written in C, and generates C code as output, it's not
entirely unreasonable to assume that questions about it are topical --
but they're not. Since this is a very busy newsgroup, we're a bit
sensitive about topicality.

Either comp.compilers or (for bison) one of the gnu.* newsgroups might
be able to help you.

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) ks***@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this.

[Christopher Benson-Manica]

Profetas <xu*****@yahoo.com> spoke thus:

does anobody know other way? I was using yacc and then I tried bison but
they are the same, I have done what is in the manual but there they have a
very limited mid-rule topic

Your post is off-topic for comp.lang.c. Please visit

http://www.ungerhu.com/jxh/clc.welcome.txt
http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html
http://benpfaff.org/writings/clc/off-topic.html

for posting guidelines and frequently asked questions. Thank you.

--
Christopher Benson-Manica | I *should* know what I'm talking about - if I
ataru(at)cyberspace.org | don't, I need to know. Flames welcome.

[Dan Pop]

In <ln************@nuthaus.mib.org> Keith Thompson <ks***@mib.org> writes:

Since yacc is written in C, and generates C code as output, it's not
entirely unreasonable to assume that questions about it are topical --
but they're not.

By this logic, since cfront (or f2c or p2c or any of the other xxx to C
converters) is written in C and generates C code as output it's not
entirely unreasonable to assume that questions about it are topical.

Dan
--
Dan Pop
DESY Zeuthen, RZ group
Email: Da*****@ifh.de

[Arthur J. O'Dwyer]

On Tue, 20 Jul 2004, Dan Pop wrote:

In <ln************@nuthaus.mib.org> Keith Thompson <ks***@mib.org> writes:

Since yacc is written in C, and generates C code as output, it's not
entirely unreasonable to assume that questions about it are topical --
but they're not.

By this logic, since cfront (or f2c or p2c or any of the other xxx to C
converters) is written in C and generates C code as output it's not
entirely unreasonable to assume that questions about it are topical.

Right. Which is why it could surprise a newbie to discover that
questions about cfront, like questions about yacc, are not topical.
Read for comprehension, Dan. (Didn't someone quite recently warn
you that you were flailing around annoying people, and you ought to
stick to the good C-related answers you are /good/ at providing?)

-Arthur

[Rob van der Leek]

In article <cd***********@sunnews.cern.ch>, Dan Pop wrote:

In <ln************@nuthaus.mib.org> Keith Thompson <ks***@mib.org> writes:

Since yacc is written in C, and generates C code as output, it's not
entirely unreasonable to assume that questions about it are topical --
but they're not.

By this logic, since cfront (or f2c or p2c or any of the other xxx to C
converters) is written in C and generates C code as output it's not
entirely unreasonable to assume that questions about it are topical.

He did not argued that such logic is valid, he just showed why some
people might consider those questions topical.

--
Rob van der Leek | rob(at)ricardis(dot)tudelft(dot)nl

[Dan Pop]

In <sl*************************@centerfold.its-s.tudelft.nl> Rob van der Leek <ro***********@yahoo.com> writes:

In article <cd***********@sunnews.cern.ch>, Dan Pop wrote:

In <ln************@nuthaus.mib.org> Keith Thompson <ks***@mib.org> writes:

Since yacc is written in C, and generates C code as output, it's not
entirely unreasonable to assume that questions about it are topical --
but they're not.

By this logic, since cfront (or f2c or p2c or any of the other xxx to C
converters) is written in C and generates C code as output it's not
entirely unreasonable to assume that questions about it are topical.

He did not argued that such logic is valid, he just showed why some
people might consider those questions topical.

Since when "it is not entirely unreasonable" is supposed to mean "it is
illogical"?

Dan
--
Dan Pop
DESY Zeuthen, RZ group
Email: Da*****@ifh.de

[Dan Pop]

In <Pi**********************************@unix46.andre w.cmu.edu> "Arthur J. O'Dwyer" <aj*@nospam.andrew.cmu.edu> writes:

On Tue, 20 Jul 2004, Dan Pop wrote:

In <ln************@nuthaus.mib.org> Keith Thompson <ks***@mib.org> writes:

>Since yacc is written in C, and generates C code as output, it's not
>entirely unreasonable to assume that questions about it are topical --
>but they're not.
By this logic, since cfront (or f2c or p2c or any of the other xxx to C
converters) is written in C and generates C code as output it's not
entirely unreasonable to assume that questions about it are topical.

Right. Which is why it could surprise a newbie to discover that
questions about cfront, like questions about yacc, are not topical.

In my almost 12 years spent on c.l.c, I have never seen a newbie posting
questions about cfront here. So, apparently, newbies are familiar with
the idea that cfront, despite being written in C and generating C code,
is topical elsewhere.

On an unrelated note, it seems that most of the confusion between C and
C++ is caused by compilers and IDEs that accept both languages, using one
heuristic or another to "guess" the language intended by the user. So,
someone intending to write C code might get the wrong ideas about the
language if his tool is operating in C++ mode. Seen this quite
frequently on c.l.c: people compiling "C" files with the extension cpp.
Read for comprehension, Dan. (Didn't someone quite recently warn

I do. Do *you*?

Dan
--
Dan Pop
DESY Zeuthen, RZ group
Email: Da*****@ifh.de

[Default User]

Profetas wrote:

And this is a C question in what way?

If you don't know the topic don't even reply, google it

Again I ask, how is this a question about the C language? You asked it,
it ain't up to me to go google anything. You obviously didn't bother
with checking out the newsgroup before posting your question to see
whether it was on-topic or not.

Brian Rodenborn

[Arthur J. O'Dwyer]

On Tue, 20 Jul 2004, Dan Pop wrote:

"Arthur J. O'Dwyer" <aj*@nospam.andrew.cmu.edu> writes:

On Tue, 20 Jul 2004, Dan Pop wrote:

In <ln************@nuthaus.mib.org> Keith Thompson <ks***@mib.org> writes:
>Since yacc is written in C, and generates C code as output, it's not
>entirely unreasonable to assume that questions about it are topical --
>but they're not.

By this logic, since cfront (or f2c or p2c or any of the other xxx to C
converters) is written in C and generates C code as output it's not
entirely unreasonable to assume that questions about it are topical.

Right. Which is why it could surprise a newbie to discover that
questions about cfront, like questions about yacc, are not topical.

In my almost 12 years spent on c.l.c, I have never seen a newbie posting
questions about cfront here.

This is because newbies do not know what cfront /is/. Even 12
years ago, I bet there weren't too many newbies using cfront. But
it would not surprise me if a newbie /did/ ask a question about
cfront here, thinking it was topical. I wouldn't be surprised if
it rained tomorrow, either --- even though I've never seen it rain
tomorrow in... well... /more/ than 12 years!

Note for the Pops in the audience: The bit about raining was
intended humorously. It is not a direct analogy. However, just
because newbies don't know cfront exists doesn't necessarily
mean they know all about its topicality here. I rather suspect
the opposite.

-Arthur,
signing off

[Keith Thompson]

Da*****@cern.ch (Dan Pop) writes:

In <sl*************************@centerfold.its-s.tudelft.nl> Rob van
der Leek <ro***********@yahoo.com> writes:

In article <cd***********@sunnews.cern.ch>, Dan Pop wrote:

In <ln************@nuthaus.mib.org> Keith Thompson <ks***@mib.org> writes:

Since yacc is written in C, and generates C code as output, it's not
entirely unreasonable to assume that questions about it are topical --
but they're not.

By this logic, since cfront (or f2c or p2c or any of the other xxx to C
converters) is written in C and generates C code as output it's not
entirely unreasonable to assume that questions about it are topical.

He did not argued that such logic is valid, he just showed why some
people might consider those questions topical.

Since when "it is not entirely unreasonable" is supposed to mean "it is
illogical"?

It doesn't, and nobody has said it did.

I believe my original point was sufficiently clear. Based on past
experience, I doubt that I'll be able to explain it to Dan's
satisfaction, so I'm not going to try.

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) ks***@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this.

[Dan Pop]

In <ln************@nuthaus.mib.org> Keith Thompson <ks***@mib.org> writes:

Da*****@cern.ch (Dan Pop) writes:

In <sl*************************@centerfold.its-s.tudelft.nl> Rob van
der Leek <ro***********@yahoo.com> writes:

>In article <cd***********@sunnews.cern.ch>, Dan Pop wrote:
>> In <ln************@nuthaus.mib.org> Keith Thompson <ks***@mib.org> writes:
>>
>>>Since yacc is written in C, and generates C code as output, it's not
>>>entirely unreasonable to assume that questions about it are topical --
>>>but they're not.
>>
>> By this logic, since cfront (or f2c or p2c or any of the other xxx to C
>> converters) is written in C and generates C code as output it's not
>> entirely unreasonable to assume that questions about it are topical.
>
>He did not argued that such logic is valid, he just showed why some
>people might consider those questions topical.
Since when "it is not entirely unreasonable" is supposed to mean "it is
illogical"?

It doesn't, and nobody has said it did.

I believe my original point was sufficiently clear.

Indeed. I was pointing out its fallacy, not its lack of clarity.
Based on past
experience, I doubt that I'll be able to explain it to Dan's
satisfaction, so I'm not going to try.

There is nothing needing further explanations. Your point was wrong
and I have explained why.

Dan
--
Dan Pop
DESY Zeuthen, RZ group
Email: Da*****@ifh.de

[Dan Pop]

In <Pi**********************************@unix45.andre w.cmu.edu> "Arthur J. O'Dwyer" <aj*@nospam.andrew.cmu.edu> writes:

On Tue, 20 Jul 2004, Dan Pop wrote:

"Arthur J. O'Dwyer" <aj*@nospam.andrew.cmu.edu> writes:

>On Tue, 20 Jul 2004, Dan Pop wrote:
>> In <ln************@nuthaus.mib.org> Keith Thompson <ks***@mib.org> writes:
>> >Since yacc is written in C, and generates C code as output, it's not
>> >entirely unreasonable to assume that questions about it are topical --
>> >but they're not.
>>
>> By this logic, since cfront (or f2c or p2c or any of the other xxx to C
>> converters) is written in C and generates C code as output it's not
>> entirely unreasonable to assume that questions about it are topical.
>
> Right. Which is why it could surprise a newbie to discover that
>questions about cfront, like questions about yacc, are not topical.

In my almost 12 years spent on c.l.c, I have never seen a newbie posting
questions about cfront here.

This is because newbies do not know what cfront /is/.

I was, obviously, not talking about C newbies, but about cfront newbies.
Read for comprehension, Arthur.

Dan
--
Dan Pop
DESY Zeuthen, RZ group
Email: Da*****@ifh.de

[Profetas]

what a chaos here, 15 posts to decide if it off topic or not. people here
must have a lot of time lol, if some one post a off topic question just
give him/her a link of the "rules" that show that it is off topic.

[Mabden]

"Profetas" <xu*****@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4a******************************@localhost.ta lkaboutprogramming.com...

what a chaos here, 15 posts to decide if it off topic or not. people here
must have a lot of time lol, if some one post a off topic question just
give him/her a link of the "rules" that show that it is off topic.

It's "someone" not "some one".

--
Mabden

[Ben Pfaff]

ra*@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) writes:

"Mabden" <mabden@sbc_global.net> writes:

It's "someone" not "some one".

You should use a comma in front of "not".

And then we'll get to argue whether the comma should go inside or
outside the quotation marks!
--
Ben Pfaff
email: bl*@cs.stanford.edu
web: http://benpfaff.org