I've always been hesitant about LL(1) since it requires a hack for something as common as expression-parsing, whereas LR is fine. Note that the linked article i

I've always been hesitant about LL(1) since it requires a hack for something as common as expression-parsing, whereas LR is fine. Note that the linked article is misleading about LR having a problem with right-recursion: it only affects (data) stack depth, rather than breaking the machine like the LL problem. Still, LL and LR have common ground against the heresy of backtracking at least. I've never met a sane grammar that's not LALR(1). It's unfortunate that LALR(1) is such a leap of complexity beyond SLR(1), which is not practical for real languages. I imagine that LL(1) "mostly" works after the expression hack - what's your particular motivation for LL(2)? A lot of weird grammars lead to code that's hard to parse for humans. (Note also that, for languages (Python, Javascript, etc.) that lack an efficient `switch` statement, table-based is likely to beat function-call-based code)