infix-notation

Infix expression evaluation [closed]

a 夏天 提交于 2019-12-08 09:45:28
问题 It's difficult to tell what is being asked here. This question is ambiguous, vague, incomplete, overly broad, or rhetorical and cannot be reasonably answered in its current form. For help clarifying this question so that it can be reopened, visit the help center. Closed 7 years ago . I would like to evaluate(not convert) infix expression in C++. If you posses algorithm or even implementation of such algorithm(may be not C++, any language... I will try to rewrite it to C++) share please.

Why do we have to reverse the string when converting from infix to prefix

梦想的初衷 提交于 2019-12-08 08:12:39
问题 In the first step itself of converting an infix to prefix can someone explain in simple terms why should we reverse the string? Is there any alternative method to convert? 回答1: Yes, you are absolutely right that if you have to convert infix to prefix then you have to scan the string from right to left. Why not from left to right? If you scan from left to right then you will require future knowledge of operators in the string. Example 1 : Infix : 2+3 Prefix : +23 Now, when you convert it from

Postfix to infix with unary/binary operators

梦想的初衷 提交于 2019-12-08 06:29:58
问题 I am trying to make a converter from postfix to infix notation and need some help. There is already a question about infix-to-postfix conversion, which gives an example I am failing to convert back. (Note: a minus sign is missing there!) The following is the output of my converter, where the 1st "column" is postfix input, the 2nd is my infix output, and the 3rd is what I probably should get(?): 2 - = - 2 =? - 2 true 1 + 2 + = + 1 + 2 =? + 1 + 2 true 1 + 2 + + = + (+ 1 + 2) =? + 1 + + 2 false

How can I accept negative values in Postfix and Infix Notation?

*爱你&永不变心* 提交于 2019-12-08 05:38:41
问题 I've written a few methods for a calculator. One, which evaluates an entered Postfix expression and another, which transfers an entered infix expression into a postfix expression. Both these methods allow multi digit integers aswell as floats for the number input types. Now for my question: I want to include the negative input in both these methods e.g. Infix: "3 * (-1)". However I'm kinda lacking an idea on how to implement this problem. Maybe someone can give me ideas or code examples. I'm

How can I accept negative values in Postfix and Infix Notation?

十年热恋 提交于 2019-12-07 03:27:25
I've written a few methods for a calculator. One, which evaluates an entered Postfix expression and another, which transfers an entered infix expression into a postfix expression. Both these methods allow multi digit integers aswell as floats for the number input types. Now for my question: I want to include the negative input in both these methods e.g. Infix: "3 * (-1)". However I'm kinda lacking an idea on how to implement this problem. Maybe someone can give me ideas or code examples. I'm including both methods below. A few simple methods are used in them which aren't shown here, but most

Convert Infix to Postfix with Stack [duplicate]

白昼怎懂夜的黑 提交于 2019-12-06 08:09:56
问题 This question already has answers here : Handling parenthesis while converting infix expressions to postfix expressions (2 answers) Closed 2 years ago . I have to make a program that changes an expression written in Infix notation to Postfix notation. I am running into a problem when I start using parentheses. For example, when I put in "a + (c - h) / (b * d)" is comes out as "ac+h-b/d*" when it should come out as "a c h - b d * / +." Would really appreciate the help. Thanks. import java.util

what is benefits for changing from infix to postfix?

[亡魂溺海] 提交于 2019-12-06 06:18:57
I read book today. It introduced algorithm about chaning from infix to postfix.. What is benefits? Thanks in advance. Well for one, you can easily evaluate a postfix expression in a single scan from left to right with the help of a stack, unlike evaluating infix expressions. and second, there is no need of the concept of parentheses and precedence rules etc. in a postfix expression. I think infix is really easy to understand for human. Postfix is the good way for machine to process. Please prefer: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~pjj/cs2121/fix.html An advanced example that also illustrates the

Shunting-yard algorithm in c++

﹥>﹥吖頭↗ 提交于 2019-12-06 01:48:57
I need a function that takes an infix string (like "3 + 4 * 9"), and convert it to postfix (like "4 9 * 3 +"). I got it working until you throw in parentheses within parentheses. I've been working on it all day and can't figure out what I'm doing wrong- can someone with a fresh mind see it, maybe? I feel like I'm really close! Thanks! Here's the code: string ExpressionManager::infixToPostfix(string infixExpression) { cout << "itop Testing : " << infixExpression << endl; string posnums = "0123456789"; string posops = "+-*/%(){}[]"; string onlyops = "+-/%*"; string space = " "; string openbra =

Arithmetic Expression Evaluation using Reverse Polish Notation (RPN)

风格不统一 提交于 2019-12-05 17:30:28
A mathematical expression is usually expressed in infix notation. For evaluation purposes, we can change it to postfix (reverse polish) notation (using algorithms like Shunting-Yard ) and then evaluate the postfix notation using stack. I found out that calculators use this technique, but do today's modern compilers use this for arithmetic expression evaluation? Is it efficient enough or other techniques (or algorithms) are being used? To answer this question let's focus on the concepts you mention, infix notation , Shunting-Yard and evaluation and then relate them to compiling. To start with

Infix notation and with(…) does not work as I expected

青春壹個敷衍的年華 提交于 2019-12-05 13:13:25
Consider the following scenario: I have a class Test class Test() { infix fun say(msg: String) = println(msg) } and a main method fun main(args: Array<String>) { val test = Test() test say "Hello World!" //Works with(test) { say "Goodbye World!" //Does not work say("Hello again!") //Works } } As you can see I'm testing out the infix notation. Considering with(...) allows you to work with the object passed as parameter in the with block without having to access its members through the dot notation, I would expect the infix notation to work like I show in my example above. Unfortunately this