Thanks for the response Jeffrey. That would be awesome. Consider this a 
vote for early bailing (Earley bailing?) in R3.

Mike

On Wednesday, August 8, 2018 at 1:40:47 PM UTC-5, Jeffrey Kegler wrote:
>
> It make *lots* of sense and I've considered it as a feature in R3.  It 
> will never happen in R2 -- it'd be a massive risky change and R2 is stable.
>
> Incidentally, a limited implementation of it is how LATM lexing works.  As 
> a special case, I selectively turn on and off predictions in Earley set 0 
> of the lexer.
>
> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 2:31 PM, Michael Spertus <[email protected] 
> <javascript:>> wrote:
>
>> Thanks for the link, Amon. As I suspected, it says you should travers the 
>> ASF in such cases...
>>
>> In a related question, is there any way for me to reject a rule during 
>> the read() by listening for a prediction/completion events? A number of my 
>> rules have conditions on their arguments that are known not to be 
>> BNF-friendly. I know I can bail from those in a semantic action, but I 
>> would like to reject before an exponential explosion in the number of 
>> ambiguous parses. Does that make sense?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Mike
>>
>>
>> On Wednesday, August 8, 2018 at 12:01:24 AM UTC-7, amon wrote:
>>
>>> Your grammar as written is ambiguous and therefore Marpa gives you all 
>>> parses in an unspecified order – to see them, iterate over the value 
>>> like 
>>>
>>> while (my $ref = $recce->value) { 
>>>     print Dumper $$ref; 
>>> } 
>>>
>>> Marpa's ranks are a bit unintuitive, I previously ran into very 
>>> similar problems. This lead to the Marpa::R2::Semantics::Rank 
>>> document[1] being written (Thanks Jeffrey!). That document shows a 
>>> related example. The solution seems to be to spell out the sequence 
>>> rule explicitly: 
>>>
>>> statements ::= xy rank => 1 
>>> statements ::= x 
>>> statements ::= y 
>>> statements ::= statements xy rank => 1 
>>> statements ::= statements x 
>>> statements ::= statements y 
>>>
>>> The docs emphasize: “The rank of a parse choice is the rank of the 
>>> rule of its cause”, which suggests the problem is the intermediate 
>>> statement rule. If I understand correctly, the "statements ::= 
>>> statement+" sequence rule has no choices because it always gets a 
>>> statement at each position (not a choice between x and xy). And the 
>>> rank within statement does not matter because … I still don't 
>>> understand this 100%. 
>>>
>>> [1]: 
>>> https://metacpan.org/pod/release/JKEGL/Marpa-R2-5.043_043/pod/Semantics/Rank.pod
>>>  
>>>
>>> On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 at 07:33, Michael Spertus <[email protected]> 
>>> wrote: 
>>> > 
>>> > This time with attachment :/ 
>>> > 
>>> > On Wednesday, August 8, 2018 at 12:20:39 AM UTC-5, Michael Spertus 
>>> wrote: 
>>> >> 
>>> >> Thanks for helping me to get to a (surprising) answer to my previous 
>>> question. I was hoping you could help me with another. I want the following 
>>> grammar to parse 'xy' as a single statement 
>>> >> 
>>> >>> statements ::= statement+ 
>>> >>> statement ::= xy | x | y 
>>> >>> x ::= 'x' 
>>> >>> y ::= 'y' 
>>> >>> xy ::= 'x' 'y' 
>>> >>> 
>>> >> 
>>> >> Unfortunately, it always parses as two statements, even if I use the 
>>> attached "high_rule_only" code and rank the statement alternatives as 
>>> >> 
>>> >>>  statement ::= xy rank => 1 | x | y 
>>> >> 
>>> >> 
>>> >> I still get two statements. Is there a way I can do this with 
>>> ordering, or do I need to do something like traverse the ASF? Note that I 
>>> need to do this at the ::= level rather than with lexemes because in the 
>>> actual grammar I care about x and y are complicated rules themselves. 
>>> >> 
>>> >> Thanks, 
>>> >> Mike 
>>> >> 
>>> > -- 
>>> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
>>> Groups "marpa parser" group. 
>>> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send 
>>> an email to [email protected]. 
>>> > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. 
>>>
>> -- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "marpa parser" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
>> email to [email protected] <javascript:>.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"marpa parser" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to