<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Parsing on Siddharth Mishra</title><link>http://brightprogrammer.in/tags/parsing/</link><description>Recent content in Parsing on Siddharth Mishra</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Sun, 14 Jun 2026 21:53:10 -0700</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="http://brightprogrammer.in/tags/parsing/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Fixing Recursions In Grammar</title><link>http://brightprogrammer.in/posts/fixing-recursions-in-grammar/</link><pubDate>Sat, 01 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>http://brightprogrammer.in/posts/fixing-recursions-in-grammar/</guid><description>&lt;h1 id="edit-12th-feb-2025">Edit 12th Feb 2025&lt;/h1>
&lt;div class="notice notice-info">
 &lt;p class="notice-title">Info&lt;/p>
 &lt;div class="notice-body">So, it turns out the actual grammar is more complex than what I initially thought. There seems to be a kind-of &lt;em>&lt;strong>induced recursion&lt;/strong>&lt;/em>
due to mutual recursion between rule $\text{prefix}$, $\text{template-prefix}$ and $\text{prefix}$, $\text{closure-prefix}$.
If you&amp;rsquo;re reading this post for the first time, just disregard this message.&lt;/div>
&lt;/div>

&lt;p>&lt;a href="#further-reading">\[
\text{A long-standing issue regarding algorithms that manipulate} \\
\text{context-free grammars (CFGs) in a “top-down” left-to-right fashion} \\
\text{is that left recursion can lead to nontermination.} ^{\text{[1]}}
\]&lt;/a>&lt;/p></description></item></channel></rss>