Hello,
> You can write "any (==p) r", using a partial application of the equality
> predicate. Reads better IMHO.
OR: you could write the slightly better (see below) version
any (p==) r
Notice that this is directly partial application, rather than a shorthand
for "(flip (==) p)". The
For example, it can parse "E -> E + E | i" on sentences with 201 tokens in
a small number of seconds; the previous version could not handle more than
41 in reasonable time.
You can get the code from CVS, or download the files via the following:
http://www.dur.ac.uk/p.c.calla
Hello,
> Does this mean that it is not possible to put multiple entry points
> into a GLR parser?
Correct: the GLR parser doesn't provide this standard Happy functionality.
There is the work-around that you mention.
I decided to leave %name out this time, mainly because of the possibility
of t
grammar. (Watch this page for news:
http://www.dur.ac.uk/p.c.callaghan/happy-glr/)
Paul
Dr Paul Callaghan (Lecturer) Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Computer Assisted Reasoning Group, Department of
/p.c.callaghan/happy-glr
This will be a permanent page for distributing information, tips,
interesting examples, experimental releases etc.
The currently contains a current linux build (as .tgz, compiled on
Fedora), and a current windows build (as a zip file)
These packages contain full documentation on
ining this code is planned soon, but if anyone
is curious and would like to try the code out in advance, I'd be grateful
for comments / bugs reports. You can build from CVS, or download a linux
distribution from http://www.dur.ac.uk/p.c.callaghan/glr-dist.tgz
This package contains brief i
