Talk:Parsing/Shunting-yard algorithm: Difference between revisions

← Older edit

Talk:Parsing/Shunting-yard algorithm (view source)

Revision as of 04:32, 30 November 2015

2,416 bytes added , 8 years ago

m

→‎incorrect programs?: added whitespace and bigger font to help clarify some character strings.

Anonymous user

rosettacode>Gerard Schildberger

Revision as of 04:00, 13 December 2011 (view source) rosettacode>Dgamey m (→‎C and missing functionality) ← Older edit		Latest revision as of 04:32, 30 November 2015 (view source) rosettacode>Gerard Schildberger m (→‎incorrect programs?: added whitespace and bigger font to help clarify some character strings.)
(7 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown)
Line 6: <nowiki>{{improved}}</nowiki>! --[[User:Paddy3118\|Paddy3118]] 05:47, 6 December 2011 (UTC) ==incorrect programs?== I noticed that at least one programming example is treating the input string as characters instead of tokens.   This works as long as all the numbers (and/or operators) are single characters.   Would it be possible to change (shudder) the test input string specification (or add another) to include a (say) multi-digit number?   If it's not reasonable to add another test case, how about changing the   <big>'''4''' </big>   to   <big>'''004'''</big>   which wouldn't affect the calculated output.   Another possibility would be to change (say) the   <big>'''5'''</big>   to   <big>'''5.'''</big>   (for instance).   And yet another possibility would be to add   <big>'''**'''</big>   as an additional exponentiation symbol (or some other compound operator).   Changing the test case (or adding one) will eliminate the need for flagging the program as   ''incorrect''   which I probably won't commit to doing as I really don't have any practical way to verify if the suspect program will work correctly with tokens instead of characters.   -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger\|Gerard Schildberger]] 06:42, 14 December 2012 (UTC) == Improve Description == : This seems to be about infix to RPN but it doesn't say it explicitly. --[[User:Dgamey\|Dgamey]] 04:00, 13 December 2011 (UTC) :Hi Dgamey, from the wikipedia article: ::''"In computer science, the shunting-yard algorithm is a method for parsing mathematical expressions specified in infix notation. It can be used to produce output in Reverse Polish notation (RPN) or as an abstract syntax tree (AST)."'' :The title reflects that it is this shunting-yard algorithm that is to be used in transforming infix to, in this case, RPN. --[[User:Paddy3118\|Paddy3118]] 09:07, 13 December 2011 (UTC) :: It's a minor nit I know but it didn't say it. I made a slight tweak in the description. Not everybody knows algorithms by name or remembers if they have broader application. Nor does everyone read the WP article. (Good set of tasks though). --[[User:Dgamey\|Dgamey]] 14:45, 13 December 2011 (UTC) :::Thanks for the great criticism Dgamey. Ideally I'd want to put enough on the RC page to make it complete in itself, but sometimes the linked-to wikipedia page is quite rich (and I feel a little lazy ...) --[[User:Paddy3118\|Paddy3118]] 06:23, 14 December 2011 (UTC) :::: And then there are those lazy people who don't want to read the WP article :) --[[User:Dgamey\|Dgamey]] 12:26, 14 December 2011 (UTC)