hokein added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/pseudo/lib/GLR.cpp:85
- if (!PendingAccept.empty()) {
- LLVM_DEBUG({
- llvm::dbgs() << llvm::formatv("Accept: {0} accepted result:\n",
- PendingAccept.size());
- for (const auto &Accept : PendingAccept)
- llvm::dbgs() << " - " << G.symbolName(Accept.Head->Payload->symbol())
- << "\n";
- });
- assert(PendingAccept.size() == 1);
- return *PendingAccept.front().Head->Payload;
- }
+ const ForestNode *Result = nullptr;
+ StateID AcceptState = Params.Table.getGoToState(StartState, StartSymbol);
----------------
sammccall wrote:
> rather than mingling this with the glrReduce, I'd suggest collecting the set
> of final heads first and then analyzing them afterwards.
>
> This means looping a second time, but I think the logic around recognizing
> patterns that look like `accept` might grow (e.g. if we want to incorporate
> some error tolerance)
that sounds reasonable, but it requires some additional changes (to identify
inactive heads in the callback of `glrReduce`):
- AddSteps now returns true/false whether there is any actions in
LRTable[NewHead->state][nextTok];
- no available action in the acceptable state on the eof token in LRTable (see
the change in lr-build-basic.test);
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D125677/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D125677
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
