is it correct please tell me its urgent!
why you extented your dfa..
in first canonical set itself there was RR conflict(A--->epsilon B--->epsilon).., there itself you can say that it is not LR(0)...
one more thing, A---> .epsilon, is itself reduce move, so you need not take transition on it.
yes...correct
given grammar is not LR(0).....due to RR conflict....
and u need not to go to other state.....A->.eps can be also be written as A->.
means in the beginning conflict occurs....
64.3k questions
77.9k answers
244k comments
80.0k users