TY - JOUR
AU1 - Anisimov, A.
AB - UDC 5I :681.3.06 A. V. Anisimov The idea of controlfing the process of syntactic analysis goes back to early research into compilation theory. The most feasible notion is that of controlling derivation by using binary contexts. At present, this idea has been fairly thoroughly developed by Red'ko [2] and his students. In syntactic analysis, two basic strateNes are usually used - the expansion method (top-to-bottom) and the contraction method (bottom-to-top). Effective combined methods also exist. As practice shows, the syntactic organization of programming languages is fairly simple. For example, most current parsing programs that are oriented toward the expansion method use a si~gie- valued choice of alternatives among k terminal symbols that are considered. Although cases in which k symbols are not sufficient for single-valued choice of production are occasionally encountered, they are relatively rare and can be handled by special subroutines. Powerful programming languages such as PL/I and ALGOL-68 can per- form non-dead-end expansion analysis by looking one symbol ahead and addressing "oracle" subroutines when one symbol is not sufficient for single-valued choice of production [3]. Contraction usually involves the use of schemes such as Knuth's LR(k)-grammars [41. The LR(k)-scheme employs regular derivation control. Analysis of most syntactic 
TI - Control apparatus in syntactic analyzers
JF - Cybernetics and Systems Analysis
DO - 10.1007/BF01069439
DA - 2005-01-14
UR - https://www.deepdyve.com/lp/springer-journals/control-apparatus-in-syntactic-analyzers-120ks1B0Y6
SP - 981
EP - 983
VL - 10
IS - 6
DP - DeepDyve
ER -