On Sun, Jul 3, 2016, at 21:15, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: > On Monday, July 4, 2016 at 12:40:14 PM UTC+12, BartC wrote: > > The structure of such a parser doesn't need to exactly match the grammar > > with a dedicated block of code for each operator precedence. It can be > > table-driven so that an operator precedence value is just an attribute. > > Of course. But that’s not a recursive-descent parser any more.
It's still recursive descent if it, for example, calls the _same_ block of code recursively with arguments to tell it which operator is being considered. This would be analogous to, in Python, implementing a recursive-descent parser with arbitrary callable objects instead of simple functions. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
