From: anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at   
      
   Kaz Kylheku <545-066-4921@kylheku.com> writes:   
   >You need the concept of associativity to tell whether   
   >A + B + C  is  (A + B) + C  or  A + (B + C).   
      
   But if + is really associative (e.g., not FP addition), these two are   
   equivalent.   
      
   >In table shift-reduce parsers (Yacc, and such), associativity rules   
   >resolve conflicts.   
      
   Of course, you can also write the grammar in an unambiguous way, then   
   you don't need associativity rules to resolve the ambiguity; a   
   disadvantage of precedence and associativity declarations is that they   
   can hide more ambiguities than you intended.   
      
   - anton   
   --   
   M. Anton Ertl   
   anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at   
   http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)