Which of the following macros can put a micro assembler into an infinite loop?
(i)
.MACRO M1 X
.IF EQ, X ;if X=0 then
M1 X + 1
.ENDC
.IF NE X ;IF X≠0 then
.WORD X ;address (X) is stored
here
.ENDC
.ENDM
(ii)
.MACRO M2 X
.IF EQ X
M2 X
.ENDC
.IF NE, X
.WORD X+1
.ENDC
.ENDM

Related MCQs

• The grammar whose productions are <stmt> → if id then <stmt> <stmt> → if id then <stmt> else <stmt> <stmt> → id := id is ambiguous because a) the sentence if a then if b then c:= d has two parse trees b) the left most and right most derivations of the sentence if a then if b then c:= d give rise to different parse trees c) the sentence if a then if b then c:= d else c:= f has more than two parse trees d) the sentence if a then if b then c:= d else c:= f has two parse trees
• In multi-programmed systems, it is advantageous if some programs such as editors and compilers can be shared by several users. Which of the following must be true of multi-programmed systems in order that a single copy of a program can be shared by several users? I. The program is a macro II. The program is recursive III.The program is reentrant
• Consider the following decision problems: (P1) Does a given finite state machine accept a given string (P2) Does a given context free grammar generate an infinite number of stings Which of the following statements is true?
• Which of the following are decidable ? 1. whether the intersection of two regular language is infinite. 2. whether a give context free language is regular 3. whether two push down automata accept the same language. 4. whether a given grammar is context free
• Which of the following are decidable? I. Whether the intersection of two regular languages is infinite II. Whether a given context-free language is regular III. Whether two push-down automata accept the same language IV. Whether a given grammar is context-free
• Consider the following translation scheme. S → ER R → *E{print("*");}R | ε E→ F + E {print("+");} | F F → (S) | id {print(id.value);} Here id is a token that represents an integer and id.value represents the corresponding integer value. For an input '2 * 3 + 4', this translation scheme prints
• Consider the translation scheme shown below S → T R R → + T {print ('+');} R | ε T → num {print (num.val);} Here num is a token that represents an integer and num.val represents the corresponding integer value. For an input string '9 + 5 + 2', this translation scheme will print
• Which of the following problems are decidable? 1) Does a given program ever produce an output? 2) If L is a context-free language, then is L’ (complement of L) also context-free? 3) If L is a regular language, then is L’ also regular? 4) If L is a recursive language, then, is L’ also recursive?
• Which of the following statements are TRUE? I. There exist parsing algorithms for some programming languages whose complexities are less than O(n3). II. A programming language which allows recursion can be implemented with static storage allocation. III. No L-attributed definition can be evaluated in the framework of bottom-up parsing. IV. Code improving transformations can be performed at both source language and intermediate code level.
• Consider the following two sets of LR(1) items of an LR(1) grammar. X -> c.X, c/d X -> .cX, c/d X -> .d, c/d X -> c.X, $ X -> .cX, $ X -> .d, $ Which of the following statements related to merging of the two sets in the corresponding LALR parser is/are FALSE? 1. Cannot be merged since look aheads are different. 2. Can be merged but will result in S-R conflict. 3. Can be merged but will result in R-R conflict. 4. Cannot be merged since goto on c will lead to two different sets.