Bottom up parsing

• Construct a parse tree for an input string beginning at

leaves and going towards root OR
• Reduce a string w of input to start symbol of grammar
Consider a grammar
S  aABe The sentential forms
A  Abc | b happen to be a right most
Bd derivation in the reverse
And reduction of a string order.
a bbcde SaABe
aAbcde aAde
aAde
aAbcde
aABe
abbcde
S 1
 Shift reduce parsing
• Split string being parsed into two parts
– Two parts are separated by a special
character “.”
– Left part is a string of terminals and non
terminals
– Right part is a string of terminals

• Initially the input is .w

2
 Shift reduce parsing …
• Bottom up parsing has two actions
• Shift: move terminal symbol from
right string to left string
if string before shift is α.pqr
then string after shift is αp.qr

3
 Shift reduce parsing …
• Reduce: immediately on the left of
“.” identify a string same as RHS of
a production and replace it by LHS

if string before reduce action is αβ.pqr

and Aβ is a production
then string after reduction is αA.pqr
4
 Example
Assume grammar is E  E+E | E*E | id
Parse id*id+id
Assume an oracle tells you when to shift / when to reduce
String action (by oracle)
.id*id+id shift
id.*id+id reduce Eid
E.*id+id shift
E*.id+id shift
E*id.+id reduce Eid
E*E.+id reduce EE*E
E.+id shift
E+.id shift
E+id. Reduce Eid
E+E. Reduce EE+E
E. ACCEPT 5
 Shift reduce parsing …
• Symbols on the left of “.” are kept on a stack
– Top of the stack is at “.”
– Shift pushes a terminal on the stack
– Reduce pops symbols (rhs of production) and
pushes a non terminal (lhs of production) onto
the stack
• The most important issue: when to shift and
when to reduce
• Reduce action should be taken only if the
result can be reduced to the start symbol
6
 Issues in bottom up parsing
• How do we know which action to
take
– whether to shift or reduce
– Which production to use for
reduction?
• Sometimes parser can reduce but
it should not:
XЄ can always be used for
reduction!
7
 Issues in bottom up parsing
• Sometimes parser can reduce in
different ways!
• Given stack δ and input symbol a,
should the parser
– Shift a onto stack (making it δa)
– Reduce by some production Aβ
assuming that stack has form αβ (making
it αA)
– Stack can have many combinations of αβ
– How to keep track of length of β?
8
 Handles
• The basic steps of a bottom-up parser
are
– to identify a substring within a rightmost
sentential form which matches the RHS of
a rule.
– when this substring is replaced by the LHS
of the matching rule, it must produce the
previous rightmost-sentential form.
• Such a substring is called a handle
 Handle
• A handle of a right sentential form γ is
– a production rule A→ β, and
– an occurrence of a sub-string β in γ
such that
• when the occurrence of β is replaced by A
in γ, we get the previous right sentential
form in a rightmost derivation of γ.

10
 Handle
Formally, if
S rm* αAw rm αβw,
then
• β in the position following α,
• and the corresponding production A β
is a handle of αβw.

• The string w consists of only terminal

symbols

11
 Handle
• We only want to reduce handle
and not any RHS

• Handle pruning: If β is a handle

and A  β is a production then
replace β by A

• A right most derivation in reverse

can be obtained by handle
pruning. 12
 Handle: Observation
• Only terminal symbols can appear
to the right of a handle in a
rightmost sentential form.
• Why?

13
 Handle: Observation
Is this scenario possible:
• 𝛼𝛽𝛾 is the content of the stack
• 𝐴 → 𝛾 is a handle
• The stack content reduces to 𝛼𝛽𝐴
• Now B → 𝛽 is the handle
In other words, handle is not on top, but
buried inside stack
Not Possible! Why?
14
 Handles …
• Consider two cases of right most
derivation to understand the fact
that handle appears on the top of
the stack

𝑆 → 𝛼𝐴𝑧 → 𝛼𝛽𝐵𝑦𝑧 → 𝛼𝛽𝛾𝑦𝑧

𝑆 → 𝛼𝐵𝑥𝐴𝑧 → 𝛼𝐵𝑥𝑦𝑧 → 𝛼𝛾𝑥𝑦𝑧

15
 Handle always appears on the top
Case I: 𝑆 → 𝛼𝐴𝑧 → 𝛼𝛽𝐵𝑦𝑧 → 𝛼𝛽𝛾𝑦𝑧
stack input action
αβγ yz reduce by Bγ
αβB yz shift y
αβBy z reduce by A βBy
αA z
Case II: 𝑆 → 𝛼𝐵𝑥𝐴𝑧 → 𝛼𝐵𝑥𝑦𝑧 → 𝛼𝛾𝑥𝑦𝑧
stack input action
αγ xyz reduce by Bγ
αB xyz shift x
αBx yz shift y
αBxy z reduce Ay
αBxA z 16
 Shift Reduce Parsers
• The general shift-reduce technique is:
– if there is no handle on the stack then
shift
– If there is a handle then reduce
• Bottom up parsing is essentially the
process of detecting handles and
reducing them.
• Different bottom-up parsers differ in
the way they detect handles.
17
 Conflicts
• What happens when there is a
choice
– What action to take in case both
shift and reduce are valid?
shift-reduce conflict
– Which rule to use for reduction if
reduction is possible by more than
one rule?
reduce-reduce conflict
18
 Conflicts
• Conflicts come either because of
ambiguous grammars or parsing
method is not powerful enough

19
 Shift reduce conflict
Consider the grammar E  E+E | E*E | id
and the input id+id*id
stack input action stack input action
E+E *id reduce by EE+E E+E *id shift
E *id shift E+E* id shift
E* id shift E+E*id reduce by Eid
E*id reduce by Eid E+E*E reduce by EE*E
E*E reduce byEE*E E+E reduce by EE+E
E E

20
 Reduce reduce conflict
Consider the grammar M  R+R | R+c | R
Rc
and the input c+c
Stack input action Stack input action
c+c shift c+c shift
c +c reduce by Rc c +c reduce by Rc
R +c shift R +c shift
R+ c shift R+ c shift
R+c reduce by Rc R+c reduce by MR+c
R+R reduce by MR+R M
M
21
 LR parsing
• Input buffer contains the input
string.
input • Stack contains a string of the
form S0X1S1X2……XnSn
where each X i is a grammar
stack

parser output
driver symbol and each Si is a state.
• Table contains action and goto
parts.
action goto
• action table is indexed by state
and terminal symbols.
Parse table
• goto table is indexed by state
and non terminal symbols. 22
 EE+T | T
Consider a grammar
Example and its parse table
TT*F | F
F  ( E ) | id
State id + * ( ) $ E T F
0 s5 s4 1 2 3
1 s6 acc
2 r2 s7 r2 r2
3 r4 r4 r4 r4
4 s5 s4 8 2 3
5 r6 r6 r6 r6
6 s5 s4 9 3
7 s5 s4 10 action
8 s6 s11
9 r1 s7 r1 r1
10 r3 r3 r3 r3 goto
11 r5 r5 r5 r5 23
 Actions in an LR (shift reduce) parser
• Assume Si is top of stack and ai is current
input symbol

• Action [Si,ai] can have four values

1. sj: shift ai to the stack, goto state Sj
2. rk: reduce by rule number k
3. acc: Accept
4. err: Error (empty cells in the table)

24
 Driving the LR parser
Stack: S0X1S1X2…XmSm Input: aiai+1…an$

• If action[Sm,ai] = shift S
Then the configuration becomes
Stack: S0X1S1……XmSmaiS Input: ai+1…an$

• If action[Sm,ai] = reduce Aβ

Then the configuration becomes
Stack: S0X1S1…Xm-rSm-r AS Input: aiai+1…an$
Where r = |β| and S = goto[Sm-r,A]
25
 Driving the LR parser
Stack: S0X1S1X2…XmSm Input: aiai+1…an$

• If action[Sm,ai] = accept
Then parsing is completed. HALT

• If action[Sm,ai] = error (or empty cell)

Then invoke error recovery routine.

26
 Parse id + id * id
Stack Input Action
0 id+id*id$ shift 5
0 id 5 +id*id$ reduce by Fid
0F3 +id*id$ reduce by TF
0T2 +id*id$ reduce by ET
0E1 +id*id$ shift 6
0E1+6 id*id$ shift 5
0 E 1 + 6 id 5 *id$ reduce by Fid
0E1+6F3 *id$ reduce by TF
0E1+6T9 *id$ shift 7
0 E 1 + 6 T 9 * 7 id$ shift 5
0 E 1 + 6 T 9 * 7 id 5 $ reduce by Fid
0 E 1 + 6 T 9 * 7 F 10 $ reduce by TT*F
0E1+6T9 $ reduce by EE+T
0E1 $ ACCEPT
27
 Configuration of a LR parser
• The tuple
<Stack Contents, Remaining Input>
defines a configuration of a LR parser
• Initially the configuration is
<S0 , a0a1…an$ >
• Typical final configuration on a
successful parse is
< S0X1Si , $>

28
 LR parsing Algorithm
Initial state: Stack: S0 Input: w$

while (1) {
if (action[S,a] = shift S’) {
push(a); push(S’); ip++
} else if (action[S,a] = reduce Aβ) {
pop (2*|β|) symbols;
push(A); push (goto*S’’,A+)
(S’’ is the state at stack top after popping symbols)
} else if (action[S,a] = accept) {
exit
} else { error }
29
 Constructing parse table
Augment the grammar
• G is a grammar with start symbol S
• The augmented grammar G’ for G has
a new start symbol S’ and an
additional production S’  S
• When the parser reduces by this rule it
will stop with accept

30
 Production to Use for Reduction
• How do we know which production to apply
in a given configuration
• We can guess!
– May require backtracking
• Keep track of “ALL” possible rules that can
apply at a given point in the input string
– But in general, there is no upper bound on the
length of the input string
– Is there a bound on number of applicable rules?
 Some hands on!
• 𝐸′ → 𝐸 Strings to Parse
• 𝐸 →𝐸+𝑇 • id + id + id + id
• 𝐸→𝑇 • id * id * id * id
• 𝑇 →𝑇∗𝐹 • id * id + id * id
• 𝑇→𝐹 • id * (id + id) * id
• 𝐹 → (𝐸)
• 𝐹 → 𝑖𝑑
 Parser states
• Goal is to know the valid reductions at
any given point
• Summarize all possible stack prefixes α as
a parser state
• Parser state is defined by a DFA state that
reads in the stack α
• Accept states of DFA are unique
reductions
33
 Viable prefixes
• α is a viable prefix of the grammar if
– ∃w such that αw is a right sentential form
– <α,w> is a configuration of the parser
• As long as the parser has viable prefixes on
the stack no parser error has been seen
• The set of viable prefixes is a regular
language
• We can construct an automaton that
accepts viable prefixes
34
 LR(0) items
• An LR(0) item of a grammar G is a
production of G with a special symbol “.” at
some position of the right side
• Thus production A→XYZ gives four LR(0)
items
A  .XYZ
A  X.YZ
A  XY.Z
A  XYZ.

35
 LR(0) items
• An item indicates how much of a
production has been seen at a point in the
process of parsing
– Symbols on the left of “.” are already on
the stacks
– Symbols on the right of “.” are expected
in the input

36
 Start state
• Start state of DFA is an empty
stack corresponding to S’.S item
• This means no input has been seen
• The parser expects to see a string
derived from S

37
 Closure of a state
• Closure of a state adds items for
all productions whose LHS occurs
in an item in the state, just after
“.”
– Set of possible productions to be
reduced next
– Added items have “.” located at the
beginning
– No symbol of these items is on the
stack as yet
38
 Closure operation
• Let I be a set of items for a grammar G
• closure(I) is a set constructed as follows:
– Every item in I is in closure (I)
– If A  α.Bβ is in closure(I) and B  γ is a
production then B  .γ is in closure(I)
• Intuitively A α.Bβ indicates that we
expect a string derivable from Bβ in input
• If B  γ is a production then we might
see a string derivable from γ at this point
39
 Example
For the grammar If I is , E’  .E } then
closure(I) is
E’  E
EE+T | T E’  .E
TT*F | F E  .E + T
F → ( E ) | id E  .T
T  .T * F
T  .F
F  .id
F  .(E)
40
 Goto operation
• Goto(I,X) , where I is a set of items
and X is a grammar symbol,
– is closure of set of item A αX.β
– such that A → α.Xβ is in I

• Intuitively if I is a set of items for

some valid prefix α then goto(I,X)
is set of valid items for prefix αX

41
 Goto operation
If I is , E’E. , EE. + T } then
goto(I,+) is

E  E + .T
T  .T * F
T  .F
F  .(E)
F  .id
42
 Sets of items
C : Collection of sets of LR(0) items for
grammar G’
C = , closure ( , S’  .S } ) }
repeat
for each set of items I in C
for each grammar symbol X
if goto (I,X) is not empty and not in C
ADD goto(I,X) to C
until no more additions to C

43
 Example
Grammar: I2: goto(I0,T)
E’  E E  T.
E  E+T | T T  T. *F
T  T*F | F
F  (E) | id I3: goto(I0,F)
T  F.
I0: closure(E’.E)
E′  .E
E  .E + T I4: goto( I0,( )
E  .T F  (.E)
T  .T * F E  .E + T
T  .F E  .T
F  .(E)
F  .id T  .T * F
T  .F
I1: goto(I0,E) F  .(E)
E′  E. F  .id
E  E. + T
I5: goto(I0,id)
F  id.
44
I6: goto(I1,+) I9: goto(I6,T)
E  E + .T E  E + T.
T  .T * F T  T. * F
T  .F
F  .(E) goto(I6,F) is I3
F  .id goto(I6,( ) is I4
goto(I6,id) is I5
I7: goto(I2,*)
I10: goto(I7,F)
T  T * .F T  T * F.
F .(E)
F  .id goto(I7,( ) is I4
goto(I7,id) is I5
I8: goto(I4,E)
F  (E.) I11: goto(I8,) )
E  E. + T F  (E).

goto(I4,T) is I2 goto(I8,+) is I6
goto(I4,F) is I3 goto(I9,*) is I7
goto(I4,( ) is I4
goto(I4,id) is I5 45
 id

id I5
+ id
I1 I6 I9
( ( +
*
(
)
I0 I4 I8 I11
id
(
I2 * I7 I10

I3

46
 F I5

E T
I1 I6 I9

E
I0 I4 I8 I11
T F T
F
I2 I7 I10

I3

47
 id

id I5
F

E + T id
I1 I6 I9
( ( +
*
(
E )
I0 I4 I8 I11
T F T id
(
F
I2 * I7 I10

I3

48
 LR(0) (?) Parse Table
• The information is still not sufficient to
help us resolve shift-reduce conflict.
For example the state:
I1: E′  E.
E  E. + T
• We need some more information to
make decisions.
 Constructing parse table
• First(α) for a string of terminals and non
terminals α is
– Set of symbols that might begin the fully
expanded (made of only tokens) version of α
• Follow(X) for a non terminal X is
– set of symbols that might follow the derivation
of X in the input stream
X

first follow
50
 Compute first sets
• If X is a terminal symbol then first(X) = {X}
• If X  Є is a production then Є is in first(X)
• If X is a non terminal and X  YlY2 … Yk is a
production, then
if for some i, a is in first(Yi)
and Є is in all of first(Yj) (such that j<i)
then a is in first(X)
• If Є is in first (Y1) … first(Yk) then Є is in
first(X)
• Now generalize to a string 𝛼 of terminals
and non-terminals
51
 Example
• For the expression grammar
E  T E‘ E'  +T E' | Є
T  F T' T'  * F T' | Є
F  ( E ) | id

First(E) = First(T) = First(F)

= { (, id }
First(E')
= {+, Є}
First(T')
= { *, Є}
52
 Compute follow sets
1. Place $ in follow(S) // S is the start symbol
2. If there is a production A → αBβ
then everything in first(β) (except ε) is in
follow(B)
3. If there is a production A → αBβ and first(β)
contains ε
then everything in follow(A) is in follow(B)
4. If there is a production A → αB
then everything in follow(A) is in follow(B)
Last two steps have to be repeated until the
follow sets converge.
53
 Example
• For the expression grammar
E  T E’
E'  + T E' | Є
T  F T'
T'  * F T' | Є
F  ( E ) | id

follow(E) = follow(E’) = , $, ) -
follow(T) = follow(T’) = , $, ), + -
follow(F) = { $, ), +, *}
54
 Construct SLR parse table
• Construct C={I0, …, In} the collection of
sets of LR(0) items
• If Aα.aβ is in Ii and goto(Ii,a) = Ij
then action[i,a] = shift j
• If Aα. is in Ii
then action[i,a] = reduce Aα for all a in
follow(A)
• If S'S. is in Ii then action[i,$] = accept
• If goto(Ii,A) = Ij
then goto[i,A]=j for all non terminals A
• All entries not defined are errors
55
 Notes
• This method of parsing is called SLR (Simple LR)
• LR parsers accept LR(k) languages
– L stands for left to right scan of input
– R stands for rightmost derivation
– k stands for number of lookahead token
• SLR is the simplest of the LR parsing methods.
SLR is too weak to handle most languages!
• If an SLR parse table for a grammar does not
have multiple entries in any cell then the
grammar is unambiguous
• All SLR grammars are unambiguous
• Are all unambiguous grammars in SLR?
56
 Practice Assignment
Construct SLR parse table for following grammar

E  E + E | E - E | E * E | E / E | ( E ) | digit

Show steps in parsing of string

9*5+(2+3*7)

• Steps to be followed
– Augment the grammar
– Construct set of LR(0) items
– Construct the parse table
– Show states of parser as the given string is parsed
57
 Example
• Consider following grammar and its SLR parse table:
S’  S
SL=R I1: goto(I0, S)
SR S’  S.
L  *R
L  id I2: goto(I0, L)
RL S  L.=R
R  L.
I0: S’  .S
S  .L=R Assignment (not
S  .R to be submitted):
L  .*R Construct rest of
L  .id the items and the
R  .L
parse table.
58
 SLR parse table for the grammar

= * id $ S L R
0 s4 s5 1 2 3
1 acc
2 s6,r6 r6
3 r3
4 s4 s5 8 7
5 r5 r5
6 s4 s5 8 9
7 r4 r4
8 r6 r6
9 r2
59
The table has multiple entries in action[2,=]
• There is both a shift and a reduce entry in
action[2,=]. Therefore state 2 has a shift-
reduce conflict on symbol “=“, However,
the grammar is not ambiguous.
• Parse id=id assuming reduce action is taken
in [2,=]
Stack input action
0 id=id shift 5
0 id 5 =id reduce by Lid
0L2 =id reduce by RL
0R3 =id error

60
• if shift action is taken in [2,=]
Stack input action
0 id=id$ shift 5
0 id 5 =id$ reduce by Lid
0L2 =id$ shift 6
0L2=6 id$ shift 5
0 L 2 = 6 id 5 $ reduce by Lid
0L2=6L8 $ reduce by RL
0L2=6R9 $ reduce by SL=R
0S1 $ ACCEPT

61
 Problems in SLR parsing
• No sentential form of this grammar can start with R=…
• However, the reduce action in action[2,=] generates a
sentential form starting with R=
• Therefore, the reduce action is incorrect
• In SLR parsing method state i calls for reduction on
symbol “a”, by rule Aα if Ii contains [Aα.+ and “a” is
in follow(A)
• However, when state I appears on the top of the stack,
the viable prefix βα on the stack may be such that βA
can not be followed by symbol “a” in any right
sentential form
• Thus, the reduction by the rule Aα on symbol “a” is
invalid
• SLR parsers cannot remember the left context
62
 Canonical LR Parsing
• Carry extra information in the state so that
wrong reductions by A  α will be ruled out
• Redefine LR items to include a terminal
symbol as a second component (look ahead
symbol)
• The general form of the item becomes [A 
α.β, a] which is called LR(1) item.
• Item [A  α., a] calls for reduction only if
next input is a. The set of symbols “a”s will
be a subset of Follow(A).
63
 Closure(I)

repeat
for each item [A  α.Bβ, a] in I
for each production B  γ in G'
and for each terminal b in First(βa)
add item [B  .γ, b] to I
until no more additions to I

64
 Example
Consider the following grammar
S‘ S
S  CC
C  cC | d
Compute closure(I) where I=,*S’  .S, $]}

S‘ .S, $
S  .CC, $
C  .cC, c
C  .cC, d
C  .d, c
C  .d, d
65
 Example
Construct sets of LR(1) items for the grammar on previous slide
I0: S′  .S, $ I4: goto(I0,d)
S  .CC, $ C  d., c/d
C  .cC, c/d
C  .d, c/d I5: goto(I2,C)
S  CC., $
I1: goto(I0,S)
S′  S., $ I6: goto(I2,c)
C  c.C, $
I2: goto(I0,C) C  .cC, $
S  C.C, $ C  .d, $
C  .cC, $
C  .d, $ I7: goto(I2,d)
C  d., $
I3: goto(I0,c)
C  c.C, c/d I8: goto(I3,C)
C  .cC, c/d C  cC., c/d
C  .d, c/d
I9: goto(I6,C)
C  cC., $
66
 Construction of Canonical LR
parse table
• Construct C={I0, …,In} the sets of LR(1) items.

• If [A  α.aβ, b] is in Ii and goto(Ii, a)=Ij

then action[i,a]=shift j

• If [A  α., a] is in Ii
then action[i,a] reduce A  α

• If [S′  S., $] is in Ii
then action[i,$] = accept

• If goto(Ii, A) = Ij then goto[i,A] = j for all non terminals A

67
 Parse table
State c d $ S C
0 s3 s4 1 2
1 acc
2 s6 s7 5
3 s3 s4 8
4 r3 r3
5 r1
6 s6 s7 9
7 r3
8 r2 r2
9 r2
68
 Notes on Canonical LR Parser
• Consider the grammar discussed in the previous two slides. The
language specified by the grammar is c*dc*d.

• When reading input cc…dcc…d the parser shifts cs into stack and
then goes into state 4 after reading d. It then calls for reduction by
Cd if following symbol is c or d.

• IF $ follows the first d then input string is c*d which is not in the
language; parser declares an error

• On an error canonical LR parser never makes a wrong shift/reduce

move. It immediately declares an error

• Problem: Canonical LR parse table has a large number of states

69
 LALR Parse table
• Look Ahead LR parsers

• Consider a pair of similar looking states (same kernel and

different lookaheads) in the set of LR(1) items
I4: C  d. , c/d I7: C  d., $

• Replace I4 and I7 by a new state I47 consisting of

(C  d., c/d/$)

• Similarly I3 & I6 and I8 & I9 form pairs

• Merge LR(1) items having the same core

70
 Construct LALR parse table
• Construct C={I0,……,In} set of LR(1) items

• For each core present in LR(1) items find all sets having the same
core and replace these sets by their union

• Let C' = {J0,…….,Jm} be the resulting set of items

• Construct action table as was done earlier

• Let J = I1 U I2…….U Ik
since I1 , I2……., Ik have same core, goto(J,X) will have he same
core

Let K=goto(I1,X) U goto(I2,X)……goto(Ik,X) the goto(J,X)=K

71
 LALR parse table …
State c d $ S C
0 s36 s47 1 2
1 acc
2 s36 s47 5
36 s36 s47 89
47 r3 r3 r3
5 r1
89 r2 r2 r2

72
 Notes on LALR parse table
• Modified parser behaves as original except that it will
reduce Cd on inputs like ccd. The error will eventually
be caught before any more symbols are shifted.

• In general core is a set of LR(0) items and LR(1) grammar

may produce more than one set of items with the same
core.

• Merging items never produces shift/reduce conflicts but

may produce reduce/reduce conflicts.

• SLR and LALR parse tables have same number of states.

73
 Notes on LALR parse table…
• Merging items may result into conflicts in LALR parsers
which did not exist in LR parsers

• New conflicts can not be of shift reduce kind:

– Assume there is a shift reduce conflict in some state of LALR
parser with items
{[Xα.,a],[Yγ.aβ,b]}
– Then there must have been a state in the LR parser with the same
core
– Contradiction; because LR parser did not have conflicts

• LALR parser can have new reduce-reduce conflicts

– Assume states
{[Xα., a], [Yβ., b]} and {[Xα., b], [Yβ., a]}
– Merging the two states produces
{[Xα., a/b], [Yβ., a/b]}
74
 Notes on LALR parse table…
• LALR parsers are not built by first making canonical LR parse tables

• There are direct, complicated but efficient algorithms to develop LALR

parsers

• Relative power of various classes

– SLR(1) ≤ LALR(1) ≤ LR(1)

– SLR(k) ≤ LALR(k) ≤ LR(k)

– LL(k) ≤ LR(k)

75
 Error Recovery
• An error is detected when an entry in the action table is found to be
empty.

• Panic mode error recovery can be implemented as follows:

– scan down the stack until a state S with a goto on a particular

nonterminal A is found.

– discard zero or more input symbols until a symbol a is found that can
legitimately follow A.

– stack the state goto[S,A] and resume parsing.

• Choice of A: Normally these are non terminals representing major

program pieces such as an expression, statement or a block. For
example if A is the nonterminal stmt, a might be semicolon or end.

76
 Parser Generator
• Some common parser generators

– YACC: Yet Another Compiler Compiler

– Bison: GNU Software
– ANTLR: ANother Tool for Language Recognition

• Yacc/Bison source program specification (accept LALR

grammars)
declaration
%%
translation rules
%%
supporting C routines

77
 Yacc and Lex schema
C code for lexical analyzer
Token Lex.yy.c
specifications
Lex

Grammar C code for

specifications
Yacc parser y.tab.c

C
Compiler

Object code

Input Parser Abstract

program Syntax tree

Refer to YACC Manual 78

 Bottom up parsing …
• A more powerful parsing technique

• LR grammars – more expensive than LL

• Can handle left recursive grammars

• Can handle virtually all the programming languages

• Natural expression of programming language syntax

• Automatic generation of parsers (Yacc, Bison etc.)

• Detects errors as soon as possible

• Allows better error recovery

79