From: chakaram@auth.gr   
      
   Hello,   
      
   I don't think your assumption that any LL(k) can be transformed into   
   an LL(k-1) is correct. The 'k' in LL(k) is assumed to be the supremum   
   of lookahead symbols that you need in order to parse your input. So,   
   suppose you have an LL(2) grammar, then you cannot convert it to an   
   LL(1) since the LL(1) equivalent won't have disjoint FIRST/FOLLOW sets!   
      
   I am not yet very experienced when it comes to compilers, so, if my   
   answer is wrong correct me please! :-)   
      
   Regards   
   ./ck   
   --   
   Chariton Karamitas   
   Undergraduate Student   
   Electrical Engineering and Computer Engineering Department   
   Fuculty of Engineering   
   Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)