Hi,
Tom Lane wrote:
> You mean four different object types. I'm not totally clear on bison's
> scaling behavior relative to the number of productions
You really want to trade parser performance (which is *very*
implementation specific) for ease of use?
Bison generates a LALR [1] parser, which depend quite a bit on the
number of productions. But AFAIK the dependency is mostly on memory
consumption for the internal symbol sets, not so much on runtime
complexity. I didn't find hard facts about runtime complexity of LALR,
though (pointers are very welcome).
Are there any ongoing efforts to rewrite the parser (i.e. using another
algorithm, like a recursive descent parser)?
Regards
Markus
[1]: Wikipedia on the LALR parsing algorithm:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LALR_parser
