Re: Supporting multiple input syntaxes

From	luser droog <mijoryx@yahoo.com.dmarc.email>
Newsgroups	comp.compilers
Subject	Re: Supporting multiple input syntaxes
Date	2020-08-20 14:45 -0700
Organization	Compilers Central
Message-ID	<20-08-012@comp.compilers> (permalink)
References	<20-08-002@comp.compilers> <20-08-009@comp.compilers> <20-08-010@comp.compilers> <20-08-011@comp.compilers>

Show all headers | View raw

On Sunday, August 16, 2020 at 10:53:24 AM UTC-5, davidl...@gmail.com wrote:
> My friend, reporting the furthest position examined by the parser I have [found]
> useful in error cases as a simple stop gap when using a combinator approach.
>
> Thinking about it you kind of want to see the furthest failed position and the
> stack of rules above it. Such requires meta information when the code is
> written in the most natural way. For this reason and others I believe it is
> good to represent your grammar in data structures which is further in the
> direction of a compiler compiler tool (or compiler interpreter tool).

Thanks. I've done some further investigating. I built my parsers following
two papers. Hutton and Meijer, Monadic Parser Combinators
  https://www.cs.nott.ac.uk/~pszgmh/monparsing.pdf
and Hutton, Higher-Order Functions for Parsing
  https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/6669/f223fba59edaeed7fabe02b667809a5744d9.pdf

The first adds error reporting using Monad Transformers. I'm thinking about
how to move in this direction, but first I'd need to reformulate the code to
make the Monad more explicit. It should be something like an interface or
a mixin, like a base class with all virtual member functions. That could be
done by modelling my objects more like OO objects and have 'bind' and
'result' in a vtable in the Parser object.

But the second paper does it differently, and maybe something I can do
more easily. It redefines the parsers to no longer produce a list of results,
so there's no longer support for ambiguity. Then it defines them to
return a Maybe,

  maybe * ::= Fail [char] | Error [char] | OK *
.
where the OK branch has the parse tree, and Fail or Error both contain an error
message. It describes how a Fail can be transformed into an Error. But it isn't
entirely clear where the messages get injected.

Still need to do some thinking on it, but I think I can rewrite the parsers
to follow this model, and then decorate my grammar with possible errors
at each node.

Thanks for the encouragement. My classes start on Monday so I'm hoping
to accomplish something on this before then.

Back to comp.compilers | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Supporting multiple input syntaxes luser droog <mijoryx@yahoo.com.dmarc.email> - 2020-08-12 15:20 -0700
  Re: Supporting multiple input syntaxes Kaz Kylheku <793-849-0957@kylheku.com> - 2020-08-13 00:43 +0000
  Re: Supporting multiple input syntaxes Hans-Peter Diettrich <DrDiettrich1@netscape.net> - 2020-08-13 10:27 +0200
    Re: Supporting multiple input syntaxes luser droog <mijoryx@yahoo.com.dmarc.email> - 2020-08-13 21:36 -0700
    Re: Supporting multiple input syntaxes luser droog <mijoryx@yahoo.com.dmarc.email> - 2020-08-23 22:16 -0700
  Re: Supporting multiple input syntaxes minforth@arcor.de - 2020-08-13 14:15 -0700
    Re: Supporting multiple input syntaxes luser droog <mijoryx@yahoo.com.dmarc.email> - 2020-08-13 21:37 -0700
    RE: Supporting mulitple input syntaxes Christopher F Clark <christopher.f.clark@compiler-resources.com> - 2020-08-14 12:44 +0300
  Supporting multiple input syntaxes David Lovemore <davidlovemore@gmail.com> - 2020-08-15 06:42 -0700
    Re: Supporting multiple input syntaxes luser droog <mijoryx@yahoo.com.dmarc.email> - 2020-08-15 15:20 -0700
      Re: Supporting multiple input syntaxes David Lovemore <davidlovemore@gmail.com> - 2020-08-16 02:21 -0700
        Re: Supporting multiple input syntaxes luser droog <mijoryx@yahoo.com.dmarc.email> - 2020-08-20 14:45 -0700
          Re: Supporting multiple input syntaxes luser droog <mijoryx@yahoo.com.dmarc.email> - 2020-08-23 19:35 -0700
            Re: implementation languages, was Supporting multiple input syntaxes luser droog <mijoryx@yahoo.com.dmarc.email> - 2020-08-23 20:39 -0700
              Re: implementation languages, was Supporting multiple input syntaxes Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2020-08-24 17:01 +0000
                Re: implementation languages, was Supporting multiple input syntaxes luser droog <mijoryx@yahoo.com.dmarc.email> - 2020-08-28 10:56 -0700
              Re: stack languages, was Supporting multiple input syntaxes luser droog <mijoryx@yahoo.com.dmarc.email> - 2020-08-24 12:14 -0700
  Re: Supporting multiple input syntaxes gah4 <gah4@u.washington.edu> - 2020-08-23 14:26 -0700
  Re: Supporting multiple input syntaxes antispam@math.uni.wroc.pl - 2021-02-11 23:27 +0000
    Re: Supporting multiple input syntaxes Elijah Stone <elronnd@elronnd.net> - 2021-02-17 01:44 -0800
      Re: Supporting multiple input syntaxes antispam@math.uni.wroc.pl - 2021-02-23 23:28 +0000
        Re: Supporting multiple input syntaxes "ltc...@gmail.com" <ltcmelo@gmail.com> - 2021-03-14 21:08 -0400
  Re: Supporting multiple input syntaxes Rock Brentwood <rockbrentwood@gmail.com> - 2021-03-14 17:36 -0700

csiph-web