Yacc non terminal Symbol

[SSG]

I tried one lex, yacc program, but it says the error

yacc: e - line 349 of "comp_y.y", a token appears on the lhs of a
production

can anyone tell me about the error..

How to solve it...

By
SSG

[Randy Howard]

SSG wrote
(in article
<11**********************@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups .com>):

I tried one lex, yacc program, but it says the error

yacc: e - line 349 of "comp_y.y", a token appears on the lhs of a
production

can anyone tell me about the error..

Why don't you ask in an appropriate newsgroup?

comp.computers.tools.lex+yacc

Followups set...

--
Randy Howard (2reply remove FOOBAR)
"The power of accurate observation is called cynicism by those
who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw

[Jordan Abel]

On 2005-12-07, SSG <ss****@gmail.com> wrote:

I tried one lex, yacc program, but it says the error

yacc: e - line 349 of "comp_y.y", a token appears on the lhs of a
production

can anyone tell me about the error..

How to solve it...

By
SSG

It's really not on-topic for here, but there's really no way to tell
without line 349 and possibly context around it

[Martin Ambuhl]

SSG wrote:

I tried one lex, yacc program, but it says the error

yacc: e - line 349 of "comp_y.y", a token appears on the lhs of a
production

can anyone tell me about the error..

How to solve it...

$oracle -mw

- - 22. Jiji (63. Jiji)
--- Already Completed:
- - Receipt;
--- slightly beneficial to determine;
-X- initially auspicious, in the end disordered.
---

second yin:
The wife loses her hair;
do not follow,
in seven days you will get it.

- - 18. Ru (5. Xu)
--- Moistened.
- - There is a return;
--- radiant receipt;
--- determination is auspicious;
--- beneficial to ford the great river.

$

[Ingo Menger]

Jordan Abel schrieb:

On 2005-12-07, SSG <ss****@gmail.com> wrote:

I tried one lex, yacc program, but it says the error

yacc: e - line 349 of "comp_y.y", a token appears on the lhs of a
production

can anyone tell me about the error..

How to solve it...

By
SSG

It's really not on-topic for here, but there's really no way to tell
without line 349 and possibly context around it

A qualified guess is that the symbol on the left hand side of line 349
was declared as token earlier. But, on the left hand side of a grammar
rule, only non terminal symbols make sense.