Derek M Jones wrote: > The problem comes with '(x) + (y) + z' (which I gave as > a example on comment in this thread, rather than starting a > new thread; as if people were not confused enough). > There are four possible parses of this expression: two > of which are causing my current problem. The two > possible parse trees of interest are > > >If your grammar is different and it doesn't work for you, it might > >help to post the relevant parts of your actual grammar. > > Your grammar contained a single %merge. I thought at > least two are required?
All the involved (top-level) rules must have a `%merge'. In the original example, both happened to be the same rule. The second example works and shows all four trees (after fixing a few precedences in the grammar) with another `%merge' -- in the final grammar you might need some more. Frank -- Frank Heckenbach, [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://fjf.gnu.de/ GnuPG and PGP keys: http://fjf.gnu.de/plan (7977168E)
ambiguity.y
Description: Binary data
_______________________________________________ Help-bison@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-bison
