Say I have two deterministic finite state automata represented by the following transition diagrams:
FSA for keyword IF: IF
___ ___ _
/ \ I / \ F // \\
>| 0 |----->| 1 |----->||2||
\___/ \___/ \\_//
FSA for an ID: [A-Z][A-Z0-9]*
------------
___ | _ LET |
/ \ LET // \\<------
>| 0 |----->||1||
\___/ \\_//<------
| NUM |
------------
What algorithm may I use to combine them into a single deterministic finite state automata with three final states, represented by the following transition diagram:
-----------------------
| LETTER BUT F OR NUM | --------
___ | _ _ LET v _ | LET |
/ \ I // \\ F // \\----->// \\<------
>| 0 |----->||1||----->||2|| ||3||<--------
\___/ \\_// \\_//----->\\_//<------ |
| NUM | NUM | |
| ANY LETTER OTHER THAN I ------------ |
---------------------------------------------
1: ID
2: IF (IT'S ALSO AN ID, BUT THE KEYWORD IF HAS A HIGHER PRECEDENCE)
3: ID
The textbooks usually gives the automaton C
such that L(C) = L(A) U L(B)
by applying de-morgan on it, L(C) = (L(A)C [intersection] L(B)C)C.
The intersection is done by building the Cartesian product automaton, and the negation is simply switching the accepting states.
Building the union automaton can also be done directly: Build the Cartesian product automaton, and a final state is a state (a,b)
such that a
is a final state in the automaton of A
OR b
is a final state in the automaton of B
An alternative is building a Non-Deterministic Final Automaton (NFA) by simply creating a new state, and add an epsilon path for both start(A) and start(B), and use the standard algorithm for eliminating non-determinism from an automaton.
The problem - this automaton will not be minimal (far from it probably). You can try and use this algorithm on the resulting automaton in order to minimze it.