is 3:03 correct? i feel like that formula is not enough to cover the first grammar as the first grammar can derive a string of terminals and the second can't what am i missing?
Is it possible to save the collection of entire alpha ( {a1,a2,a3,..} ) and beta ( {b1,b2,b3,...} ) in two new non-terminals ? so i would have to extra rules of B--> b1,b2,b3,... and have my A grammar rule as : A --> BA`
Bro is really coocking, he able to exmpain everything he do.
I had a stroke reading this.
@@martian0x80I stroked while reading this
Thank you for the simple explanation!
Thankss for making it up reasonably well
Thanks for the best explanation ❤
Thank you, just thank you! You're INCREDIBLY good to explain, just THANK YOU!
your videos are really good
is 3:03 correct? i feel like that formula is not enough to cover the first grammar as the first grammar can derive a string of terminals and the second can't
what am i missing?
i don't see how the first one is correct either, shouldn't it be p→q + p ∣ q
It still can, just produce epsilon with the second production when needed. That epsilon is the important part.
thank you so much!! I've been meaning to understand this since forever
Hello, your videos are superb, when will the rest of the course be updated please? Also, can your courses be transferred to Chinese video sites?
Thank you sir for such a nice explaining
great video it would be great if you do one for not immediate left recursiveness
Thank you
Please create a similar playlist for bottom-up parser as well.
This chapter is already uploaded, please follow the link www.nesoacademy.org/cs/12-compiler-design
Thank you for making it seem so easy
Yiu doing great job thank you soo much ✨❤️
Nice session 🎉
thank you so much for this video
Thank you so much
Too good!
just perfect
Good tution
Is it possible to save the collection of entire alpha ( {a1,a2,a3,..} ) and beta ( {b1,b2,b3,...} ) in two new non-terminals ? so i would have to extra rules of B--> b1,b2,b3,... and have my A grammar rule as : A --> BA`
Super anna
Hari hari