Advertisement

Operator Precedence and the Visibly Pushdown Property

  • Stefano Crespi Reghizzi
  • Dino Mandrioli
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6031)

Abstract

Operator precedence languages, designated as Floyd’s Languages (FL) to honor their inventor, are a classical deterministic context-free family. FLs are known to be a boolean family, and have been recently shown to strictly include the Visibly Pushdown Languages (VPDL); the latter are FLs characterized by operator precedence relations determined by the alphabet partition. In this paper we give the non-obvious proves that FLs have the same closure properties that motivated the introduction of VPDLs, namely under reversal, concatenation and Kleene’s star. Thus, rather surprisingly, the historical FL family turns out to be the largest known deterministic context-free family that includes the VPDL and has the same closure properties needed for applications to model checking and for defining mark-up languages such as HTML. As a corollary, an extended regular expression of precedence-compatible FLs is a FL and a deterministic parser for it can be algorithmically obtained.

Keywords

Model Check Regular Expression Precedence Relation Regular Language Parse Tree 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Alur, R., Madhusudan, P.: Visibly pushdown languages. In: STOC: ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC (2004)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Alur, R., Madhusudan, P.: Adding nesting structure to words. J. ACM 56(3) (2009)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Berstel, J., Boasson, L.: Balanced grammars and their languages. In: Brauer, W., Ehrig, H., Karhumäki, J., Salomaa, A. (eds.) Formal and Natural Computing. LNCS, vol. 2300, pp. 3–25. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Caucal, D.: Synchronization of pushdown automata. In: Ibarra, O.H., Dang, Z. (eds.) DLT 2006. LNCS, vol. 4036, pp. 120–132. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Crespi Reghizzi, S.: The mechanical acquisition of precedence grammars. PhD thesis, University of California UCLA, School of Engineering (1970)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Crespi-Reghizzi, S., Guida, G., Mandrioli, D.: Operator precedence grammars and the noncounting property. SICOMP: SIAM Journ. on Computing 10, 174–191 (1981)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Crespi-Reghizzi, S., Mandrioli, D.: Algebraic properties of structured context-free languages: old approaches and novel developments. In: WORDS 2009 - 7th Int. Conf. on Words, preprints (2009), http://arXiv.org/abs/0907.2130
  8. 8.
    Crespi-Reghizzi, S., Mandrioli, D., Martin, D.F.: Algebraic properties of operator precedence languages. Information and Control 37(2), 115–133 (1978)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fischer, M.J.: Some properties of precedence languages. In: STOC ’69: Proc. first annual ACM Symp. on Theory of Computing, pp. 181–190. ACM, New York (1969)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Floyd, R.W.: Syntactic analysis and operator precedence. J. ACM 10(3), 316–333 (1963)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Grune, D., Jacobs, C.J.: Parsing techniques: a practical guide. Springer, New York (2008)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    McNaughton, R.: Parenthesis grammars. J. ACM 14(3), 490–500 (1967)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    McNaughton, R., Papert, S.: Counter-free Automata. MIT Press, Cambridge (1971)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nowotka, D., Srba, J.: Height-deterministic pushdown automata. In: Kučera, L., Kučera, A. (eds.) MFCS 2007. LNCS, vol. 4708, pp. 125–134. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Salomaa, A.K.: Formal Languages. Academic Press, London (1973)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Thatcher, J.: Characterizing derivation trees of context-free grammars through a generalization of finite automata theory. Journ. of Comp. and Syst. Sc. 1, 317–322 (1967)zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stefano Crespi Reghizzi
    • 1
  • Dino Mandrioli
    • 1
  1. 1.Dipartimento di Elettronica e InformazionePolitecnico di MilanoMilano

Personalised recommendations