Hi Hans,
thanks for your reply,
On Mon, Feb 03, 2020 at 03:00:20PM +0100, Hans Åberg wrote:
>
> > On 2 Feb 2020, at 20:29, Ervin Hegedüs <airw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > is there any way to make a parser with "dynamic" tokens?
> > I mean in compiling time I don't know the available tokens.
>
> It is not possible to have dynamically created token values, …
ah,
> > Now I describe
> > the necessary token with regex, but I bumped into a problem.
>
> … but it might be possible to use augmented methods.
ehm, you're right. I totally forgot that :).
> > Example from the language:
> > @eq 1
> > @lt 2
> > @streq foo
> >
> > The problem is that the LANG_OP_ARGUMENT could be anything - for example,
> > that could be also starts with "@". So, the next expression is valid:
> >
> > @streq @streq
>
> So here you might have a context switch that is set when the operator token
> comes, that says that the next token, even if it is a valid operator name,
> should be treated as an argument. It when the argument is finished, set the
> switch back.
>
> > Now I'm using this rules:
> > @[a-z][a-zA-Z0-9]+ { BEGIN(ST_LANG_OP); return LANG_OP; }
> > <ST_LANG_OP>....
> >
> > but now the operator isn't optional.
>
> Something must follow in the grammar, so the switch may be set back in the
> grammar. Check in the .output file for clues.
so, you think (if I understand correctly) something like this:
@[a-z][a-zA-Z0-9]+ { BEGIN(ST_LANG_OP); if(op_valid(yytext); { return
LANG_OP; } else { ... } }
<ST_LANG_OP>....
> > If I write in the language:
> > "@rx" that means that's an operator argument, without operator.
>
> One can have a symbol table that stores all operator names. If it is not
> there, return it as ain identifier. This way, one can dynamically define new
> operator.
>
> If further, the table stores the token value, it can be used for other
> object, like variables that may have different syntax depending on type.
I think it's clear - many-many thanks for your help! :)
a.
