[il-antlr-interest: 31732] Re: [antlr-interest] [SPAM] [SPAM] Re: C# Target: Problems with Mono
Olivier Lefevre lefev...@yahoo.com writes: On 3/1/2011 10:00 PM, Felix Natter wrote: I am trying to generate C# code from my grammar for use with Mono2 (v1.9). ** (Antlr3.exe:4230): WARNING **: Missing method System.Reflection.Emit.DynamicMethod::.ctor(string,Type,Type[]) 1) The Mono team is quite candid about what is missing: http://www.go-mono.com/status/ (System.Reflection can be found under mscorlib) 2) Mono 2.1.9 is ancient: the long-term and current stable versions are 2.6.7 and Thanks for the hint. Yesterday I upgraded to Mono 2.6.7 (backport from Debian squeeze, I haven't yet upgraded) and it seems I can now use the CSharp3 target by loading the .sln in monodevelop (but I have yet to test this more thoroughly). But I am quite sure that the CSharp2 target in ANTLR 3.3 is broken (but, as a last resort, the CSharp target in ANTLR 3.1 seems to work). 2.10.1: http://www.go-mono.com/mono-downloads/download.html 3) Has anyone run the ANTLR C# runtime through Moma, the Mono Migration Analyzer? http://mono-project.com/Moma That would be interesting. Greetings, -- Felix Natter List: http://www.antlr.org/mailman/listinfo/antlr-interest Unsubscribe: http://www.antlr.org/mailman/options/antlr-interest/your-email-address -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups il-antlr-interest group. To post to this group, send email to il-antlr-inter...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to il-antlr-interest+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/il-antlr-interest?hl=en.
[il-antlr-interest: 31733] Re: [antlr-interest] [SPAM] [SPAM] Re: C# Target: Problems with Mono
The CSharp2 target is currently broken, but it's in the process of getting fixed. The maintainer has been very busy, and it's been especially difficult given the extra features I've recently added to the CSharp3 target which aren't supported in C# 2. Sam -Original Message- From: antlr-interest-boun...@antlr.org [mailto:antlr-interest-boun...@antlr.org] On Behalf Of Felix Natter Sent: Saturday, March 05, 2011 9:25 AM To: antlr-interest@antlr.org Subject: Re: [antlr-interest] [SPAM] [SPAM] Re: C# Target: Problems with Mono Olivier Lefevre lefev...@yahoo.com writes: On 3/1/2011 10:00 PM, Felix Natter wrote: I am trying to generate C# code from my grammar for use with Mono2 (v1.9). ** (Antlr3.exe:4230): WARNING **: Missing method System.Reflection.Emit.DynamicMethod::.ctor(string,Type,Type[]) 1) The Mono team is quite candid about what is missing: http://www.go-mono.com/status/ (System.Reflection can be found under mscorlib) 2) Mono 2.1.9 is ancient: the long-term and current stable versions are 2.6.7 and Thanks for the hint. Yesterday I upgraded to Mono 2.6.7 (backport from Debian squeeze, I haven't yet upgraded) and it seems I can now use the CSharp3 target by loading the .sln in monodevelop (but I have yet to test this more thoroughly). But I am quite sure that the CSharp2 target in ANTLR 3.3 is broken (but, as a last resort, the CSharp target in ANTLR 3.1 seems to work). 2.10.1: http://www.go-mono.com/mono-downloads/download.html 3) Has anyone run the ANTLR C# runtime through Moma, the Mono Migration Analyzer? http://mono-project.com/Moma That would be interesting. Greetings, -- Felix Natter List: http://www.antlr.org/mailman/listinfo/antlr-interest Unsubscribe: http://www.antlr.org/mailman/options/antlr-interest/your-email-address List: http://www.antlr.org/mailman/listinfo/antlr-interest Unsubscribe: http://www.antlr.org/mailman/options/antlr-interest/your-email-address -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups il-antlr-interest group. To post to this group, send email to il-antlr-inter...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to il-antlr-interest+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/il-antlr-interest?hl=en.
[il-antlr-interest: 31734] [antlr-interest] CSharp 2 - IToken::TokenIndex clarification
List: http://www.antlr.org/mailman/listinfo/antlr-interest Unsubscribe: http://www.antlr.org/mailman/options/antlr-interest/your-email-address -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups il-antlr-interest group. To post to this group, send email to il-antlr-inter...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to il-antlr-interest+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/il-antlr-interest?hl=en.
[il-antlr-interest: 31735] Re: [antlr-interest] Tree grammar for expression subrules?
On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 11:23 PM, g...@novadsp.com g...@novadsp.com wrote: On 04/03/2011 19:13, Bart Kiers wrote: I'd expect that to become the tree-grammar rule: expression : term | ^(OR expression term) | ^(OR expression EPSILON) ; Hello Bart Once again, extremely useful input. Thanks. My question though still stands. Cannot discern any pattern in writing the tree rules as, for example, this seems to violate cardinality ... or does it? Hi, I'm starting to hesitate. Could you send your combined- or parser-grammar that produces the AST? I'll have a look at it to see if I can create a tree grammar (with a bit of comments). Regards, Bart. List: http://www.antlr.org/mailman/listinfo/antlr-interest Unsubscribe: http://www.antlr.org/mailman/options/antlr-interest/your-email-address -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups il-antlr-interest group. To post to this group, send email to il-antlr-inter...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to il-antlr-interest+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/il-antlr-interest?hl=en.
[il-antlr-interest: 31736] [antlr-interest] Question about the cost of implementing case insensitivity in an Antlr Lexer
What is the relative cost for implementing case insensitive lexer tokens [as
shown below] versus case sensitive tokens?
// case sensitive keywords
GRAPH: 'GRAPH';
DIGRAPH: 'DIGRAPH';
STRICT: 'STRICT';
NODE: 'NODE';
EDGE: 'EDGE';
SUBGRAPH: 'SUBGRAPH';
// case-insensitive keywords
GRAPH: G R A P H;
DIGRAPH: D I G R A P H;
STRICT: S T R I C T;
NODE: N O D E;
EDGE: E D G E;
SUBGRAPH: S U B G R A P H;
fragment A:('a'|'A');
fragment B:('b'|'B');
fragment C:('c'|'C');
fragment D:('d'|'D');
fragment E:('e'|'E');
fragment F:('f'|'F');
fragment G:('g'|'G');
fragment H:('h'|'H');
fragment I:('i'|'I');
fragment J:('j'|'J');
fragment K:('k'|'K');
fragment L:('l'|'L');
fragment M:('m'|'M');
fragment N:('n'|'N');
fragment O:('o'|'O');
fragment P:('p'|'P');
fragment Q:('q'|'Q');
fragment R:('r'|'R');
fragment S:('s'|'S');
fragment T:('t'|'T');
fragment U:('u'|'U');
fragment V:('v'|'V');
fragment W:('w'|'W');
fragment X:('x'|'X');
fragment Y:('y'|'Y');
fragment Z:('z'|'Z');
List: http://www.antlr.org/mailman/listinfo/antlr-interest
Unsubscribe:
http://www.antlr.org/mailman/options/antlr-interest/your-email-address
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
il-antlr-interest group.
To post to this group, send email to il-antlr-inter...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
il-antlr-interest+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/il-antlr-interest?hl=en.
[il-antlr-interest: 31737] Re: [antlr-interest] Tree grammar for expression subrules?
You write expressions like that in the following way: expression : ^(OR expression expression) | term ; term : X | Y | Z ; Then do not create the UPSILON as it will just mislead you. if you feel you need it then add it to term, which although allowing ^(OR EPSILION EPSILON) won't happen because you won't produce that tree. However, don't generally make a token for something that isn't there. Jim -Original Message- From: antlr-interest-boun...@antlr.org [mailto:antlr-interest- boun...@antlr.org] On Behalf Of Bart Kiers Sent: Saturday, March 05, 2011 9:09 AM To: g...@novadsp.com Cc: antlr-interest@antlr.org interest Subject: Re: [antlr-interest] Tree grammar for expression subrules? On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 11:23 PM, g...@novadsp.com g...@novadsp.com wrote: On 04/03/2011 19:13, Bart Kiers wrote: I'd expect that to become the tree-grammar rule: expression : term | ^(OR expression term) | ^(OR expression EPSILON) ; Hello Bart Once again, extremely useful input. Thanks. My question though still stands. Cannot discern any pattern in writing the tree rules as, for example, this seems to violate cardinality ... or does it? Hi, I'm starting to hesitate. Could you send your combined- or parser- grammar that produces the AST? I'll have a look at it to see if I can create a tree grammar (with a bit of comments). Regards, Bart. List: http://www.antlr.org/mailman/listinfo/antlr-interest Unsubscribe: http://www.antlr.org/mailman/options/antlr-interest/your- email-address List: http://www.antlr.org/mailman/listinfo/antlr-interest Unsubscribe: http://www.antlr.org/mailman/options/antlr-interest/your-email-address -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups il-antlr-interest group. To post to this group, send email to il-antlr-inter...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to il-antlr-interest+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/il-antlr-interest?hl=en.
[il-antlr-interest: 31738] [antlr-interest] Tree construction rewrite rule error
Hi there,
I'm currently using the Java.g parser grammar (by Yang Jiang) from
http://openjdk.java.net/projects/compiler-grammar/ and am trying to add
tree construction rewrite rules and operators to build an AST. That's
quite a job in itself (I'm trying roughly to base it on one I found in
the mercurial repository on that site that contained actions that
created a javac-style AST).
Anyway, my specific question relates to the LAST ALTERNATIVE in the
following rule (from the expression hierarchy):
unaryExpressionNotPlusMinus
: TILDE unaryExpression - ^(BITWISE_COMPLEMENT unaryExpression)
| BANG unaryExpression - ^(LOGICAL_COMPLEMENT unaryExpression)
| castExpression
| {inHandlerDeclaration||inRunMethodDeclaration}?=
inSynchronizationExpression // only allowed within handler declarations
(which in turn are inside component definitions)
| primary - primary
(selector - selector[$unaryExpressionNotPlusMinus.tree])*
( PLUSPLUS - ^(POSTINC $unaryExpressionNotPlusMinus)
| SUBSUB - ^(POSTDEC $unaryExpressionNotPlusMinus)
)?
;
The last alternative does look a little complicated but it is basically
creating a single tree from the 'primary' in case nothing else is
matched (due to the * and ? that mean we could not match anything),
while the subsequent rewrite rules (-) within the alternative are
successively building up the tree by making the tree constructed thus
far a child of a newly created tree (this is done by referencing the
rule itself -- referencing $unaryExpressionNotPlusMinus in the context
of a rewrite rule means take the current value of the tree of
unaryExpressionNotPlusMinus).
However, when I run the grammar through ANTLR (3.3) I get the following
errors:
error(100): /JavaBTranslator/src/JavaBPhase1SynSem1.g:1026:19: syntax
error: antlr: expecting RPAREN, found '-'
|--- (selector - selector[$unaryExpressionNotPlusMinus.tree])*
error(100): /JavaBTranslator/src/JavaBPhase1SynSem1.g:1027:22: syntax
error: antlr: expecting RPAREN, found '-'
|--- ( PLUSPLUS - ^(POSTINC $unaryExpressionNotPlusMinus)
error(10): internal error: /JavaBTranslator/src/JavaBPhase1SynSem1.g :
java.lang.NullPointerException
3 errors
It seems that ANTLR does not like the - that appear in the middle of
the alternative for some reason. The problem could be a simple ANTLR
syntax thing which I'm not clear about.
Anyone have any ideas about why I'm getting these errors.
Thanks,
Stephen
PS. also, it seems that coming up with the tree grammar rules to
recognise the tree might be a little harder than constructing the tree
in the parser, at least for the more complicated tree rewrite rules like
this. But I'll have to cross that bridge when I come to it.
List: http://www.antlr.org/mailman/listinfo/antlr-interest
Unsubscribe:
http://www.antlr.org/mailman/options/antlr-interest/your-email-address
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
il-antlr-interest group.
To post to this group, send email to il-antlr-inter...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
il-antlr-interest+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/il-antlr-interest?hl=en.
[il-antlr-interest: 31739] [antlr-interest] Yang's Java.g - tree construction rules
Hello Does anyone know of a version of the Java.g written by Yang Jiang (see: http://openjdk.java.net/projects/compiler-grammar/ and http://www.antlr.org/grammar/1152141644268/Java.g) that performs tree construction using ANTLR's AST rewrite rules/construction operators (plus a tree grammar would be a bonus)? I found a version of the Java.g parser that does tree construction of javac-style trees (required by the javac backend) using actions that created custom tree node objects (as opposed to using ANTLR's AST rewrite rules/construction operators (see: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/compiler-grammar/compiler-grammar/langtools/file/e37d7d5df672/src/share/classes/com/sun/tools/javac/antlr/Java.g). I have started going through that grammar and used it to help me work out how to build the AST -- however, the code is quite long and I thought I'd check if anyone knew of a version of Java.g that contained ANTLR-style tree construction before I go any further -- I don't want to try to reproduce something that someone else might have already done and also likely done a better job at too. Thanks, Stephen List: http://www.antlr.org/mailman/listinfo/antlr-interest Unsubscribe: http://www.antlr.org/mailman/options/antlr-interest/your-email-address -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups il-antlr-interest group. To post to this group, send email to il-antlr-inter...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to il-antlr-interest+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/il-antlr-interest?hl=en.
[il-antlr-interest: 31740] Re: [antlr-interest] Tree construction rewrite rule error
You are just getting that because you need the rewrite at the end of an
alt or section:
| ( primary - primary)
...
Jim
-Original Message-
From: antlr-interest-boun...@antlr.org [mailto:antlr-interest-
boun...@antlr.org] On Behalf Of Stephen Tuttlebee
Sent: Saturday, March 05, 2011 4:08 PM
To: antlr-interest@antlr.org
Subject: [antlr-interest] Tree construction rewrite rule error
Hi there,
I'm currently using the Java.g parser grammar (by Yang Jiang) from
http://openjdk.java.net/projects/compiler-grammar/ and am trying to add
tree construction rewrite rules and operators to build an AST. That's
quite a job in itself (I'm trying roughly to base it on one I found in
the mercurial repository on that site that contained actions that
created a javac-style AST).
Anyway, my specific question relates to the LAST ALTERNATIVE in the
following rule (from the expression hierarchy):
unaryExpressionNotPlusMinus
: TILDE unaryExpression - ^(BITWISE_COMPLEMENT unaryExpression)
| BANG unaryExpression - ^(LOGICAL_COMPLEMENT unaryExpression)
| castExpression
| {inHandlerDeclaration||inRunMethodDeclaration}?=
inSynchronizationExpression // only allowed within handler declarations
(which in turn are inside component definitions)
| primary - primary
(selector - selector[$unaryExpressionNotPlusMinus.tree])*
( PLUSPLUS - ^(POSTINC $unaryExpressionNotPlusMinus)
| SUBSUB - ^(POSTDEC $unaryExpressionNotPlusMinus)
)?
;
The last alternative does look a little complicated but it is basically
creating a single tree from the 'primary' in case nothing else is
matched (due to the * and ? that mean we could not match anything),
while the subsequent rewrite rules (-) within the alternative are
successively building up the tree by making the tree constructed thus
far a child of a newly created tree (this is done by referencing the
rule itself -- referencing $unaryExpressionNotPlusMinus in the context
of a rewrite rule means take the current value of the tree of
unaryExpressionNotPlusMinus).
However, when I run the grammar through ANTLR (3.3) I get the following
errors:
error(100): /JavaBTranslator/src/JavaBPhase1SynSem1.g:1026:19: syntax
error: antlr: expecting RPAREN, found '-'
|--- (selector - selector[$unaryExpressionNotPlusMinus.tree])*
error(100): /JavaBTranslator/src/JavaBPhase1SynSem1.g:1027:22: syntax
error: antlr: expecting RPAREN, found '-'
|--- ( PLUSPLUS - ^(POSTINC $unaryExpressionNotPlusMinus)
error(10): internal error: /JavaBTranslator/src/JavaBPhase1SynSem1.g :
java.lang.NullPointerException
3 errors
It seems that ANTLR does not like the - that appear in the middle of
the alternative for some reason. The problem could be a simple ANTLR
syntax thing which I'm not clear about.
Anyone have any ideas about why I'm getting these errors.
Thanks,
Stephen
PS. also, it seems that coming up with the tree grammar rules to
recognise the tree might be a little harder than constructing the tree
in the parser, at least for the more complicated tree rewrite rules
like this. But I'll have to cross that bridge when I come to it.
List: http://www.antlr.org/mailman/listinfo/antlr-interest
Unsubscribe: http://www.antlr.org/mailman/options/antlr-interest/your-
email-address
List: http://www.antlr.org/mailman/listinfo/antlr-interest
Unsubscribe:
http://www.antlr.org/mailman/options/antlr-interest/your-email-address
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
il-antlr-interest group.
To post to this group, send email to il-antlr-inter...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
il-antlr-interest+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/il-antlr-interest?hl=en.
