|
4 | added 16 characters in body | ||
|
I’m not an expert on this topic, but I found these course notes (including some bibliographical references) which state that the language L = {xn : n ∈ ℕ} ∪ {xnyn : n ∈ ℕ} has no LL(k) parser, while being deterministic context-free (see pp. 24 and 27). Edit: I found a better reference. The paper Two iteration theorems for the LL(k) languages by J.C. Beatty contains a proof that the LR language L = {anbn, ancn : n ≥ 1} is not LL (see Theorem 5.2). |
||||
|
|
3 | deleted 79 characters in body | ||
|
I’m not an expert on this topic, but I found these course notes (including some bibliographical references) which state that the language L = {xn : n ∈ ℕ} ∪ {xnyn : n ∈ ℕ} has no LL(k) parser, while being deterministic context-free (see pp. 24 and 27). Edit: Maybe I found a better reference. The paper Two iteration theorems for the LL(k) languages by J.C. Beatty seems to contain contains a proof that some language L = {anbn, ancn : n ≥ 1} is LR but not LL (I say “seems to contain” because I can’t access that paper, but I found it via a search on Google)see Theorem 5.2). |
||||
|
|
2 | added 406 characters in body | ||
|
I’m not an expert on this topic, but I found these course notes (including some bibliographical references) which state that the language L = {xn : n ∈ ℕ} ∪ {xnyn : n ∈ ℕ} has no LL(k) parser, while being deterministic context-free (see pp. 24 and 27). Edit: Maybe I found a better reference. The paper Two iteration theorems for the LL(k) languages by J.C. Beatty seems to contain a proof that some language is LR but not LL (I say “seems to contain” because I can’t access that paper, but I found it via a search on Google). |
||||
|
1 |
|
||
