Chapter 4

Syntax Analysis
Outline
Role of parser
Context free grammars
Top down parsing
Bottom up parsing
Parser generators
 The role of parser
token Rest of
Source Lexical Parse tree Intermediate
program Analyzer Parser Front representation
getNext End
Token

Symbol
table
Uses of grammars
E -> E + T | T
T -> T * F | F
F -> (E) | id

E -> TE’
E’ -> +TE’ | Ɛ
T -> FT’
T’ -> *FT’ | Ɛ
F -> (E) | id
Error handling
Common programming errors
Lexical errors
Syntactic errors
Semantic errors
Lexical errors
Error handler goals
Report the presence of errors clearly and accurately
Recover from each error quickly enough to detect
subsequent errors
Add minimal overhead to the processing of correct progrms
Error-recover strategies
There are four common error-recovery strategies that
can be implemented in the parser to deal with errors
in the code.
Error-recover strategies……….cont’d
Panic mode recovery
Discard input symbol one at a time until one of
designated set of synchronization tokens is found
Phrase level recovery
Replacing a prefix of remaining input by some string
that allows the parser to continue
Error productions
Augment the grammar with productions that generate
the erroneous constructs
Global correction
Choosing minimal sequence of changes to obtain a
globally least-cost correction
Panic mode
When a parser encounters an error anywhere in the
statement, it ignores the rest of the statement by not
processing input from erroneous input to delimiter,
such as semi-colon. This is the easiest way of error-
recovery and also, it prevents the parser from
developing infinite loops.
Statement mode

When a parser encounters an error, it tries to take

corrective measures so that the rest of inputs of
statement allow the parser to parse ahead.

For example, inserting a missing semicolon, replacing

comma with a semicolon etc. Parser designers have to
be careful here because one wrong correction may
lead to an infinite loop.
Error productions

Some common errors are known to the compiler

designers that may occur in the code. In addition, the
designers can create augmented grammar to be used,
as productions that generate erroneous constructs
when these errors are encountered.
Global correction
The parser considers the program in hand as a whole
and tries to figure out what the program is intended to
do and tries to find out a closest match for it, which is
error-free.

When an erroneous input (statement) X is fed, it

creates a parse tree for some closest error-free
statement Y. This may allow the parser to make
minimal changes in the source code, but due to the
complexity (time and space) of this strategy, it has not
been implemented in practice yet.
Context free grammars
Terminals
Nonterminals
expression -> expression + term
Start symbol expression -> expression – term
productions expression -> term
term -> term * factor
term -> term / factor
term -> factor
factor -> (expression)
factor -> id
Derivations
Productions are treated as rewriting rules to generate
a string
Rightmost and leftmost derivations
E -> E + E | E * E | -E | (E) | id
Derivations for –(id+id)
 E => -E => -(E) => -(E+E) => -(id+E)=>-(id+id)
Parse trees
-(id+id)
 E => -E => -(E) => -(E+E) => -(id+E)=>-(id+id)
Ambiguity
For some strings there exist more than one parse tree
Or more than one leftmost derivation
Or more than one rightmost derivation
Example: id+id*id
Elimination of ambiguity
Elimination of ambiguity (cont.)
Idea:
A statement appearing between a then and an else
must be matched
Elimination of left recursion
 A grammar is left recursive if it has a non-terminal A
+
such that there is a derivation A=> Aα
 Top down parsing methods cant handle left-
recursive grammars
 A simple rule for direct left recursion elimination:
 For a rule like:
 A -> A α|β
 We may replace it with
 A -> β A’
 A’ -> α A’ | ɛ
Left recursion elimination (cont.)
There are cases like following
 S -> Aa | b
 A -> Ac | Sd | ɛ
Left recursion elimination algorithm:
 Arrange the nonterminals in some order A1,A2,…,An.
 For (each i from 1 to n) {
 For (each j from 1 to i-1) {
 Replace each production of the form Ai-> Aj γ by the production
Ai -> δ1 γ | δ2 γ | … |δk γ where Aj-> δ1 | δ2 | … |δk
are all current Aj productions
}
 Eliminate left recursion among the Ai-productions
 }
Left factoring
Left factoring is a grammar transformation that is useful
for producing a grammar suitable for predictive or top-
down parsing.
Consider following grammar:
 Stmt -> if expr then stmt else stmt
 | if expr then stmt
On seeing input if it is not clear for the parser which
production to use
We can easily perform left factoring:
 If we have A->αβ1 | αβ2 then we replace it with
 A -> αA’
 A’ -> β1 | β2
Left factoring (cont.)
Algorithm
For each non-terminal A, find the longest prefix α
common to two or more of its alternatives. If α<> ɛ,
then replace all of A-productions A->αβ1 |αβ2 | …
| αβn | γ by
 A -> αA’ | γ
 A’ -> β1 |β2 | … | βn

Example:
S -> I E t S | i E t S e S | a
E -> b
Introduction
A Top-down parser tries to create a parse tree from the
root towards the leafs scanning input from left to right
It can be also viewed as finding a leftmost derivation
for an input string
Example: id+id*id

E E E E
E -> TE’ lm lm
E
lm
E
lm lm
E’ -> +TE’ | Ɛ T E’ T E’ T E’ T E’ T E’
T -> FT’
T’ -> *FT’ | Ɛ F T’ F T’ F T’ F T’ + T E’

F -> (E) | id id id Ɛ id Ɛ
Recursive descent parsing
Consists of a set of procedures, one for each
nonterminal
Execution begins with the procedure for start symbol
A typical procedure for a non-terminal
void A() {
choose an A-production, A->X1X2..Xk
for (i=1 to k) {
if (Xi is a nonterminal
call procedure Xi();
else if (Xi equals the current input symbol a)
advance the input to the next symbol;
else /* an error has occurred */
}
}
Recursive descent parsing (cont)
General recursive descent may require backtracking
The previous code needs to be modified to allow
backtracking
In general form it cant choose an A-production easily.
So we need to try all alternatives
If one failed the input pointer needs to be reset and
another alternative should be tried
Recursive descent parsers cant be used for left-
recursive grammars
Example
S->cAd
A->ab | a Input: cad

S S S

c A d c A d c A d

a b a
First and Follow
First() is set of terminals that begins strings derived from
If α=>ɛ
* then is also in First(ɛ)
In predictive parsing when we have A-> α|β, if First(α)
and First(β) are disjoint sets then we can select
appropriate A-production by looking at the next input
Follow(A), for any nonterminal A, is set of terminals a that
can appear immediately after A in some sentential form
 If we have S *=> αAaβ for some αand βthen a is in
Follow(A)
If A can be the rightmost symbol in some sentential form,
then $ is in Follow(A)
Computing First
To compute First(X) for all grammar symbols X, apply
*
following rules until no more terminals or ɛ can be
added to any First set:
1. If X is a terminal then First(X) = {X}.
2. If X is a nonterminal and X->Y1Y2…Yk is a production
for some k>=1, then place a in First(X) if for some i a is
in First(Yi) and ɛ is in all of First(Y1),…,First(Yi-1) that
*
is Y1…Yi-1 => ɛ. if ɛ is in First(Yj) for j=1,…,k then add
ɛ to First(X).
3. If X-> ɛ is a production then add ɛ to First(X)
Example!
Computing follow
To compute First(A) for all nonterminals A, apply
following rules until nothing can be added to any
follow set:
1. Place $ in Follow(S) where S is the start symbol
2. If there is a production A-> αBβ then everything in
First(β) except ɛ is in Follow(B).
3. If there is a production A->B or a production
A->αBβ where First(β) contains ɛ, then everything
in Follow(A) is in Follow(B)
Example!
LL(1) Grammars
Predictive parsers are those recursive descent parsers needing
no backtracking
Grammars for which we can create predictive parsers are called
LL(1)
 The first L means scanning input from left to right
 The second L means leftmost derivation
 And 1 stands for using one input symbol for lookahead
A grammar G is LL(1) if and only if whenever A-> α|βare two
distinct productions of G, the following conditions hold:
 For no terminal a do αandβ both derive strings beginning with a
 At most one of α or βcan derive empty string
*
 If α=> ɛ then βdoes not derive any string beginning with a
terminal in Follow(A).
Construction of predictive
parsing table
For each production A->α in grammar do the
following:
 For each terminal a in First(α) add A-> in M[A,a]
 If ɛ is in First(α), then for each terminal b in
Follow(A) add A-> ɛ to M[A,b]. If ɛ is in First(α) and
$ is in Follow(A), add A-> ɛ to M[A,$] as well
If after performing the above, there is no production
in M[A,a] then set M[A,a] to error
Example F
First
{(,id}
Follow
{+, *, ), $}
E -> TE’ {(,id} {+, ), $}
E’ -> +TE’ | Ɛ T
E {(,id} {), $}
T -> FT’ {+,ɛ}
T’ -> *FT’ | Ɛ E’ {), $}
T’ {*,ɛ} {+, ), $}
F -> (E) | id
Input Symbol
Non -
terminal id + * ( ) $
E E -> TE’ E -> TE’

E’ E’ -> +TE’ E’ -> Ɛ E’ -> Ɛ

T T -> FT’ T -> FT’

T’ T’ -> Ɛ T’ -> *FT’ T’ -> Ɛ T’ -> Ɛ

F F -> id F -> (E)

Another example
S -> iEtSS’ | a
S’ -> eS | Ɛ
E -> b

Input Symbol
Non -
terminal a b e i t $
S S -> a S -> iEtSS’

S’ S’ -> Ɛ S’ -> Ɛ
S’ -> eS
E E -> b
Non-recursive predicting parsing
a + b $

Predictive
parsing output
stack X
Y program
Z
$
Parsing
Table
M
Predictive parsing algorithm
Set ip point to the first symbol of w;
Set X to the top stack symbol;
While (X<>$) { /* stack is not empty */
if (X is a) pop the stack and advance ip;
else if (X is a terminal) error();
else if (M[X,a] is an error entry) error();
else if (M[X,a] = X->Y1Y2..Yk) {
output the production X->Y1Y2..Yk;
pop the stack;
push Yk,…,Y2,Y1 on to the stack with Y1 on top;
}
set X to the top stack symbol;
}
Example
id+id*id$

Matched Stack Input Action

E$ id+id*id$
Error recovery in predictive parsing
Panic mode
 Place all symbols in Follow(A) into synchronization set for
nonterminal A: skip tokens until an element of Follow(A) is seen
and pop A from stack.
 Add to the synchronization set of lower level construct the
symbols that begin higher level constructs
 Add symbols in First(A) to the synchronization set of nonterminal
A
 If a nonterminal can generate the empty string then the
production deriving can be used as a default
 If a terminal on top of the stack cannot be matched, pop the
terminal, issue a message saying that the terminal was insterted
 Non - Input Symbol
terminal id + * ( ) $

Example
EE -> TE’ E -> TE’ synch synch

E’ E’ -> +TE’ E’ -> Ɛ E’ -> Ɛ

synch T -> FT’ synch synch
TT -> FT’
T’ -> Ɛ T’ -> *FT’ T’ -> Ɛ T’ -> Ɛ
T’

FF -> id synch synch F ->synch

(E) synch

Stack Input Action

E$ )id*+id$ Error, Skip )
E$ id*+id$ id is in First(E)
TE’$ id*+id$
FT’E’$ id*+id$
idT’E’$ id*+id$
T’E’$ *+id$
*FT’E’$ *+id$
FT’E’$ +id$ Error, M[F,+]=synch
T’E’$ +id$ F has been poped
Introduction
Constructs parse tree for an input string beginning at
the leaves (the bottom) and working towards the root
(the top)
Example: id*id

E -> E + T | T id*id F * id T * id T*F F E

T -> T * F | F
T*F F
F -> (E) | id id F F id

id id F id T*F

id F id

id
Shift-reduce parser
The general idea is to shift some symbols of input to the
stack until a reduction can be applied
At each reduction step, a specific substring matching the
body of a production is replaced by the nonterminal at the
head of the production
The key decisions during bottom-up parsing are about
when to reduce and about what production to apply
A reduction is a reverse of a step in a derivation
The goal of a bottom-up parser is to construct a derivation
in reverse:
E=>T=>T*F=>T*id=>F*id=>id*id
Handle pruning
A Handle is a substring that matches the body of a
production and whose reduction represents one step
along the reverse of a rightmost derivation

Right sentential form Handle Reducing production

id*id id F->id
F*id F T->F
T*id id F->id
T*F T*F E->T*F
Shift reduce parsing
A stack is used to hold grammar symbols
Handle always appear on top of the stack
Initial configuration:
Stack Input
$ w$
Acceptance configuration
Stack Input
$S $
Shift reduce parsing (cont.)
Basic operations:
Shift
Stack Input Action
Reduce
$ id*id$ shift
Accept $id *id$ reduce by F->id
Error $F *id$ reduce by T->F
$T *id$ shift
Example: id*id $T* id$ shift
$T*id $ reduce by F->id
$T*F $ reduce by T->T*F
$T $ reduce by E->T
$E $ accept
Handle will appear on top of
the stack
S S
A
B
B A
α β γ y z α γ x y z

Stack Input Stack Input

$αβγ yz$ $αγ xyz$
$αβB yz$ $αBxy z$
$αβBy z$
Conflicts during shit reduce
parsing
Two kind of conflicts
Shift/reduce conflict
Reduce/reduce conflict
Example:

Stack Input
… if expr then stmt else …$
Reduce/reduce conflict
stmt -> id(parameter_list)
stmt -> expr:=expr
parameter_list->parameter_list, parameter
parameter_list->parameter
parameter->id
expr->id(expr_list)
expr->id
expr_list->expr_list, expr
Stack Input
expr_list->expr
… id(id ,id) …$
LR Parsing
The most prevalent type of bottom-up parsers
LR(k), mostly interested on parsers with k<=1
Why LR parsers?
 Table driven
 Can be constructed to recognize all programming language
constructs
 Most general non-backtracking shift-reduce parsing method
 Can detect a syntactic error as soon as it is possible to do so
 Class of grammars for which we can construct LR parsers are
superset of those which we can construct LL parsers
States of an LR parser
States represent set of items
An LR(0) item of G is a production of G with the dot at
some position of the body:
For A->XYZ we have following items
 A->.XYZ
 A->X.YZ

 A->XY.Z

 A->XYZ.

In a state having A->.XYZ we hope to see a string

derivable from XYZ next on the input.
What about A->X.YZ?
Constructing canonical LR(0)
item sets
 Augmented grammar:
 G with addition of a production: S’->S
 Closure of item sets:
 If I is a set of items, closure(I) is a set of items constructed from I by the
following rules:
 Add every item in I to closure(I)

 If A->α.Bβ is in closure(I) and B->γ is a production then add the item B->.γ

to clsoure(I).
 Example:
I0=closure({[E’->.E]}
E’->E E’->.E
E -> E + T | T E->.E+T
T -> T * F | F E->.T
T->.T*F
F -> (E) | id T->.F
F->.(E)
F->.id
Constructing canonical LR(0)
item sets (cont.)
Goto (I,X) where I is an item set and X is a grammar
symbol is closure of set of all items [A-> αX. β] where
[A-> α.X β] is in I
I1
Example E’->E.
E E->E.+T
I0=closure({[E’->.E]}
E’->.E I2
E->.E+T T
E’->T.
E->.T T->T.*F
T->.T*F I4
T->.F ( F->(.E)
F->.(E) E->.E+T
E->.T
F->.id T->.T*F
T->.F
F->.(E)
F->.id
Closure algorithm
SetOfItems CLOSURE(I) {
J=I;
repeat
for (each item A-> α.Bβ in J)
for (each prodcution B->γ of G)
if (B->.γ is not in J)
add B->.γ to J;
until no more items are added to J on one round;
return J;
GOTO algorithm
SetOfItems GOTO(I,X) {
J=empty;
if (A-> α.X β is in I)
add CLOSURE(A-> αX. β ) to J;
return J;
}
Canonical LR(0) items
Void items(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 new set of items are added to C on a round;
}
 E’->E
E -> E + T | T

Example acc
$
T -> T * F | F
F -> (E) | id
I6 I9
E->E+.T
I1 T->.T*F T
E’->E. + T->.F
E->E+T.
T->T.*F
E E->E.+T
F->.(E)
F->.id
I0=closure({[E’->.E]} I2
E’->.E T *
I7
F I10
E->.E+T E’->T. T->T*.F
F->.(E) T->T*F.
E->.T T->T.*F id F->.id
T->.T*F id
T->.F I5
F->.(E)
F->.id ( F->id. +
I4
F->(.E)
I8 I11
E->.E+T
E->.T
E E->E.+T )
T->.T*F F->(E.) F->(E).
T->.F
F->.(E)
F->.id

I3
T>F.
Use of LR(0) automaton
Example: id*id
Line Stack Symbols Input Action
(1) 0 $ id*id$ Shift to 5
(2) 05 $id *id$ Reduce by F->id
(3) 03 $F *id$ Reduce by T->F
(4) 02 $T *id$ Shift to 7
(5) 027 $T* id$ Shift to 5
(6) 0275 $T*id $ Reduce by F->id
(7) 02710 $T*F $ Reduce by T->T*F
(8) 02 $T $ Reduce by E->T
(9) 01 $E $ accept
LR-Parsing model
INPUT a1 … ai … an $

LR Parsing Output
Sm
Program
Sm-1
…
$
ACTION GOTO
LR parsing algorithm
let a be the first symbol of w$;
while(1) { /*repeat forever */
let s be the state on top of the stack;
if (ACTION[s,a] = shift t) {
push t onto the stack;
let a be the next input symbol;
} else if (ACTION[s,a] = reduce A->β) {
pop |β| symbols of the stack;
let state t now be on top of the stack;
push GOTO[t,A] onto the stack;
output the production A->β;
} else if (ACTION[s,a]=accept) break; /* parsing is done */
else call error-recovery routine;
}
Example (0) E’->E
(1) E -> E + T
(2) E-> T
STATE ACTON GOTO
(3) T -> T * F
id + * ( ) $ E T F (4) T-> F
0 S5 S4 1 2 3 (5) F -> (E) id*id+id?
(6) F->id
1 S6 Acc
Line Stac Symbol Input Action
2 R2 S7 R2 R2
k s
3 R R7 R4 R4 (1) 0 id*id+id$ Shift to 5
4
(2) 05 id *id+id$ Reduce by F->id
4 S5 S4 8 2 3
(3) 03 F *id+id$ Reduce by T->F
5 R R R6 R6
(4) 02 T *id+id$ Shift to 7
6 6
(5) 027 T* id+id$ Shift to 5
6 S5 S4 9 3
(6) 0275 T*id +id$ Reduce by F->id
7 S5 S4 10
(7) 02710 T*F +id$ Reduce by T-
8 S6 S11 >T*F
(8) 02 T +id$ Reduce by E->T
9 R1 S7 R1 R1
(9) 01 E +id$ Shift
10 R3 R3 R3 R3
(10) 016 E+ id$ Shift
11 R5 R5 R5 R5
(11) 0165 E+id $ Reduce by F->id
(12) 0163 E+F $ Reduce by T->F
(13) 0169 E+T` $ Reduce by E-
>E+T
(14) 01 E $ accept
Constructing SLR parsing table
Method
 Construct C={I0,I1, … , In}, the collection of LR(0) items for
G’
 State i is constructed from state Ii:
 If [A->α.aβ] is in Ii and Goto(Ii,a)=Ij, then set ACTION[i,a] to “shift
j”
 If [A->α.] is in Ii, then set ACTION[i,a] to “reduce A->α” for all a in
follow(A)
 If {S’->.S] is in Ii, then set ACTION[I,$] to “Accept”
 If any conflicts appears then we say that the grammar is not
SLR(1).
 If GOTO(Ii,A) = Ij then GOTO[i,A]=j
 All entries not defined by above rules are made “error”
 The initial state of the parser is the one constructed from the
set of items containing [S’->.S]
Example grammar which is not
SLR(1) S -> L=R | R
L -> *R | id
R -> L
I0 I1 I3 I5 I7
S’->.S S’->S. S ->R. L -> id. L -> *R.
S -> .L=R
S->.R I2 I4 I6
I8
L -> .*R | S ->L.=R L->*.R S->L=.R
R -> L.
L->.id R ->L. R->.L R->.L
R ->. L L->.*R L->.*R I9
L->.id L->.id S -> L=R.

Action
=
Shift 6
2 Reduce R->L
More powerful LR parsers
Canonical-LR or just LR method
Use lookahead symbols for items: LR(1) items
Results in a large collection of items
LALR: lookaheads are introduced in LR(0) items
Canonical LR(1) items
In LR(1) items each item is in the form: [A->α.β,a]
An LR(1) item [A->α.β,a] is valid for a viable prefix γ if
*
there is a derivation S=>δAw=>δαβw, where
rm
Γ= δα
Either a is the first symbol of w, or w is ε and a is $
Example:
*
S=>aaBab=>aaaBab
S->BB rm
B->aB|b Item [B->a.B,a] is valid for γ=aaa
and w=ab
Constructing LR(1) sets of items
SetOfItems Closure(I) {
repeat
for (each item [A->α.Bβ,a] in I)
for (each production B->γ in G’)
for (each terminal b in First(βa))
add [B->.γ, b] to set I;
until no more items are added to I;
return I;
}

SetOfItems Goto(I,X) {
initialize J to be the empty set;
for (each item [A->α.Xβ,a] in I)
add item [A->αX.β,a] to set J;
return closure(J);
}

void items(G’){
initialize C to Closure({[S’->.S,$]});
repeat
for (each set of items I in C)
for (each grammar symbol X)
if (Goto(I,X) is not empty and not in C)
add Goto(I,X) to C;
until no new sets of items are added to C;
}
Example
S’->S
S->CC
C->cC
C->d
Canonical LR(1) parsing table
Method
 Construct C={I0,I1, … , In}, the collection of LR(1) items for G’
 State i is constructed from state Ii:
 If [A->α.aβ, b] is in Ii and Goto(Ii,a)=Ij, then set ACTION[i,a] to
“shift j”
 If [A->α., a] is in Ii, then set ACTION[i,a] to “reduce A->α”
 If {S’->.S,$] is in Ii, then set ACTION[I,$] to “Accept”
 If any conflicts appears then we say that the grammar is not
LR(1).
 If GOTO(Ii,A) = Ij then GOTO[i,A]=j
 All entries not defined by above rules are made “error”
 The initial state of the parser is the one constructed from the
set of items containing [S’->.S,$]
Example
S’->S
S->CC
C->cC
C->d
LALR Parsing Table
For the previous example we had:

I4
C->d. , c/d
I47
C->d. , c/d/$
I7
C->d. , $

State merges cant produce Shift-Reduce conflicts.

Why?
But it may produce reduce-reduce conflict
Example of RR conflict in state
merging
S’->S
S -> aAd | bBd | aBe | bAe
A -> c
B -> c
An easy but space-consuming
LALR table construction
Method:
1. Construct C={I0,I1,…,In} the collection of LR(1) items.
2. For each core among the set of LR(1) items, find all sets
having that core, and replace these sets by their union.
3. Let C’={J0,J1,…,Jm} be the resulting sets. The parsing
actions for state i, is constructed from Ji as before. If there
is a conflict grammar is not LALR(1).
4. If J is the union of one or more sets of LR(1) items, that is J
= I1 UI2…IIk then the cores of Goto(I1,X), …, Goto(Ik,X) are
the same and is a state like K, then we set Goto(J,X) =k.
This method is not efficient, a more efficient one is
discussed in the book
Compaction of LR parsing table
Many rows of action tables are identical
Store those rows separately and have pointers to them
from different states
Make lists of (terminal-symbol, action) for each state
Implement Goto table by having a link list for each
nonterinal in the form (current state, next state)
 Using ambiguous grammars STATE ACTON GO
TO
E->E+E id + * ( ) $ E

E->E*E 0 S3 S2 1

1 S4 S5 Acc
E->(E) 2 S3 S2 6

E->id 3 R4 R4 R4 R4

4 S3 S2 7

5 S3 S2 8

I0: E’->.E I1: E’->E. I2: E->(.E) 6 S4 S5

E->.E+E E->E.+E E->.E+E 7 R1 S5 R1 R1
E->.E*E E->E.*E E->.E*E
8 R2 R2 R2 R2
E->.(E) E->.(E)
E->.id E->.id 9 R3 R3 R3 R3

I4: E->E+.E I5: E->E*.E I6: E->(E.) I7: E->E+E.

I3: E->.id E->.E+E E->(.E) E->E.+E E->E.+E
E->.E*E E->.E+E E->E.*E E->E.*E
E->.(E) E->.E*E
E->.id E->.(E) I8: E->E*E. I9: E->(E).
E->.id E->E.+E
E->E.*E
Readings
Chapter 4 of the book