Re: parse tree

[Aurelian Melinte]

At 10:55 AM 4/20/2002 +0200, you wrote:
>At 13:06 -0400 2002/04/19, Aurelian Melinte wrote:
> >>I am not sure what you are meaning here: The parsing tree depends on the
> >>input; every language sentence has its own parsing tree.
>...
> >indeed, each node of the parsing tree will have generic informations (such
> >as the text of the symbol if any and the line on which it was found) and
> >infos specific to the grammar (for instance an integer saying which
> >nonterminal/terminal is the node representing). Once I would have the tree,
> >the analyze on it is language specific indeed.
>
>Sorry, I did not read the rest of you post in detail.
>
>The reason that Bison does not generate that is that it is a very
>inefficient approach, even more so on the computers at the time when Bison
>was first written (in the 80ies).
>
> >I also start seeing the LALR difficulties Akim is pointing to me.
>
>Bison is mainly a tool for writing fairly efficient parsers for the
>languages that one typically encounters in daily life. It then contains
>several tradeoffs:

Do you know a parser generator that a)is LL, b)is GPL and c)is C/C++ and
generates C/C++ code. Looks like this is what I am looking for :)

Thanks,
a.