[LLVMdev] on LLVM parser

[Rekha R]

Yes. I meant for clang.

Thanks for the info.

Rekha


On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 3:15 AM, Reed Kotler <rkotler at mips.com> wrote:

> On 09/26/2013 10:51 AM, Rekha R wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Would like to know the parsing strategy used in LLVM - top-down,
>> bottom-up, or any other?
>>
>> --
>> Rekha
>>
>>
>> ______________________________**_________________
>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/**mailman/listinfo/llvmdev<http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev>
>>
>>
> Do mean the Clang parsing strategy?
>
> You should post on the clang list in that case.
>
> I think it's just recursive descent.
>
> C++ with traditional lr is a disaster. I don't think anybody is trying to
> make that work anymore. You need lots of left context for parsing C++ so LL
> is more natural. LR was a cheap way to get some left context and made it
> handle a stronger language class but if you guide your parsing using the
> symbol table, then LL is stronger and easier to understand.
>
>
>
>


-- 
Rekha
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20130927/6868455a/attachment.html>