[il-antlr-interest: 32412] Re: [antlr-interest] Source code level of ANTLRWorks
The path field expects a directory where it can find the javac binary in. Adding flags behind the directory also fails: The debugger fails to initialize and leaves some process running in the background requiring me to kill the process before I can try to run the debugger again. Any more thoughts? Ben 2011/5/5 Jim Idle j...@temporal-wave.com Have you tried adding it in with the PATH? Also you can use -source 1.6 -target jsr14 and use 1.6 input and 1.4 output. Jim -Original Message- From: antlr-interest-boun...@antlr.org [mailto:antlr-interest- boun...@antlr.org] On Behalf Of Ben Corne Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2011 4:58 AM To: antlr-interest@antlr.org Subject: Re: [antlr-interest] Source code level of ANTLRWorks Here's a screenshot of my antlrworks preferences page + javac info http://igor.rave.org/antlrjavac.png I don't see the option where to adjust the commandline call. And from what I think to understand from the helppage of my javac, it says 1.4 is the default, but I don't find a way to change this default, except by writing a wrapper shell script that attaches -source 1.5 (which is what I will do now, until more clues are given) Ben 2011/5/4 Jim Idle j...@temporal-wave.com That just means you are calling a compiler that has a default level less than 1.5. So, chance the javacc command in the preferences or remove the old compiler and install 1.6, or makes sure that 1.6 is the first on the command line. ANTLR works does not influence the Java compiler - it only calls the one that you tell it to. Jim -Original Message- From: antlr-interest-boun...@antlr.org [mailto:antlr-interest- boun...@antlr.org] On Behalf Of Ben Corne Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 6:56 AM To: antlr-interest@antlr.org Subject: [antlr-interest] Source code level of ANTLRWorks Hi Is there a way to set the source code level of antlrworks? I've checked the preferences pane and launchers with no avail. I need to set it to 1.5, since I'm using Java Generics: [15:47:58] 102. ERROR in /home/bcorne/Downloads/at2-parser- 3/grammar/output/ATGrammar3Lexer.j ava (at line 114) [15:47:58] StackString paraphrase = new StackString(); [15:47:58] ^^ [15:47:58] Syntax error, parameterized types are only available if source level is 1.5 Regards Ben Corne 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 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 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: 32413] [antlr-interest] Translating expressions - advice?
Hello People,
being an ANTLR beginner, I would very much appreciate advice concerning good
practise for a rather simple task. The task is the translation of a JPQL's
(Java
Persistence Query Language) where clause into a proprietary query language.
The clause has the well-known expression structure: operands conncected by
three
operators: OR, AND and NOT, where precedence increases in that order. Example:
a.x='1' AND (a.y='2' OR b.z='3') AND a.v like 'abc%'
An important point is that the translation result will have a similar
structure,
that is, it will also be operands connected by those operators. Example:
x='1' AND (y='2' OR z='3') AND v='123*'
For this reason I am not sure if the classical approach for dealing with
left-associative operators, as shown in the Definitve ANTLR Reference (3. A
quick tour...) is the most appropriate one in this case. I mean rules like:
conditional_term ('OR'^ conditional_term)*
conditional_factor ('AND'^ conditional_factor)*
This creates deep trees, where each operator creates a new level. That is fine
for processing the operations. But a straightforward translation of the tree
into a similar sequence of operands and operators yields a result which is
correct but can be ugly, due to superflous brackets, example:
(a OR (b OR (c AND d)))
One possibility is to process the tree, removing superfluous brackets - perhaps
by passing the context operator into the rule as a parameter, so that the
rule
can decide if to create brackets or not. This should not be too difficult, but
my question is: is there a good practise for accomplishing the task? Would you
recommend the approach just sketched, or a different tree representation to
start with?
(A tree I do want because there are other parts to be translated, not only the
where clause, and a tree seems to me the way to deal with (possibly yet
growing)
complexity.
Thank you very much for any suggestions.
-- Hans-Juergen
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: 32414] Re: [antlr-interest] Translating expressions - advice?
I get the impression you think that when creating AST's, ANTLR inserts
parenthesis (brackets). This is not the case: I guess what you're seeing is
just the tree's `toStringTree()` that displays these parenthesis to make the
hierarchy of the tree apparent.
Or am I misinterpreting your question?
Regards,
Bart.
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 3:10 PM, Hans-Juergen Rennau hren...@yahoo.dewrote:
Hello People,
being an ANTLR beginner, I would very much appreciate advice concerning
good
practise for a rather simple task. The task is the translation of a JPQL's
(Java
Persistence Query Language) where clause into a proprietary query
language.
The clause has the well-known expression structure: operands conncected by
three
operators: OR, AND and NOT, where precedence increases in that order.
Example:
a.x='1' AND (a.y='2' OR b.z='3') AND a.v like 'abc%'
An important point is that the translation result will have a similar
structure,
that is, it will also be operands connected by those operators. Example:
x='1' AND (y='2' OR z='3') AND v='123*'
For this reason I am not sure if the classical approach for dealing with
left-associative operators, as shown in the Definitve ANTLR Reference (3.
A
quick tour...) is the most appropriate one in this case. I mean rules like:
conditional_term ('OR'^ conditional_term)*
conditional_factor ('AND'^ conditional_factor)*
This creates deep trees, where each operator creates a new level. That is
fine
for processing the operations. But a straightforward translation of the
tree
into a similar sequence of operands and operators yields a result which is
correct but can be ugly, due to superflous brackets, example:
(a OR (b OR (c AND d)))
One possibility is to process the tree, removing superfluous brackets -
perhaps
by passing the context operator into the rule as a parameter, so that the
rule
can decide if to create brackets or not. This should not be too difficult,
but
my question is: is there a good practise for accomplishing the task? Would
you
recommend the approach just sketched, or a different tree representation to
start with?
(A tree I do want because there are other parts to be translated, not only
the
where clause, and a tree seems to me the way to deal with (possibly yet
growing)
complexity.
Thank you very much for any suggestions.
-- Hans-Juergen
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: 32415] Re: [antlr-interest] Translating expressions - advice?
Wait I think I misunderstood. Your example `(a OR (b OR (c AND d)))` is just
an example expression, right?
In that case, yes, these parenthesis are part of the token stream, but if
you apply rewrite rules (or AST operators `^` and `!`) properly, these
parenthesis are easily removed from your parse tree.
See: http://www.antlr.org/wiki/display/ANTLR3/Tree+construction
or:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/4931346/how-to-output-the-ast-built-using-antlr
Regards,
Bart.
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 4:10 PM, Bart Kiers bki...@gmail.com wrote:
I get the impression you think that when creating AST's, ANTLR inserts
parenthesis (brackets). This is not the case: I guess what you're seeing is
just the tree's `toStringTree()` that displays these parenthesis to make the
hierarchy of the tree apparent.
Or am I misinterpreting your question?
Regards,
Bart.
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 3:10 PM, Hans-Juergen Rennau hren...@yahoo.dewrote:
Hello People,
being an ANTLR beginner, I would very much appreciate advice concerning
good
practise for a rather simple task. The task is the translation of a JPQL's
(Java
Persistence Query Language) where clause into a proprietary query
language.
The clause has the well-known expression structure: operands conncected by
three
operators: OR, AND and NOT, where precedence increases in that order.
Example:
a.x='1' AND (a.y='2' OR b.z='3') AND a.v like 'abc%'
An important point is that the translation result will have a similar
structure,
that is, it will also be operands connected by those operators. Example:
x='1' AND (y='2' OR z='3') AND v='123*'
For this reason I am not sure if the classical approach for dealing with
left-associative operators, as shown in the Definitve ANTLR Reference
(3. A
quick tour...) is the most appropriate one in this case. I mean rules
like:
conditional_term ('OR'^ conditional_term)*
conditional_factor ('AND'^ conditional_factor)*
This creates deep trees, where each operator creates a new level. That is
fine
for processing the operations. But a straightforward translation of the
tree
into a similar sequence of operands and operators yields a result which is
correct but can be ugly, due to superflous brackets, example:
(a OR (b OR (c AND d)))
One possibility is to process the tree, removing superfluous brackets -
perhaps
by passing the context operator into the rule as a parameter, so that
the rule
can decide if to create brackets or not. This should not be too difficult,
but
my question is: is there a good practise for accomplishing the task? Would
you
recommend the approach just sketched, or a different tree representation
to
start with?
(A tree I do want because there are other parts to be translated, not only
the
where clause, and a tree seems to me the way to deal with (possibly yet
growing)
complexity.
Thank you very much for any suggestions.
-- Hans-Juergen
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: 32417] Re: [antlr-interest] Source code level of ANTLRWorks
You might be better using remote debugging but you can do what you suggested earlier and create a script, then tell Works that that is the java compiler. Jim -Original Message- From: antlr-interest-boun...@antlr.org [mailto:antlr-interest- boun...@antlr.org] On Behalf Of Ben Corne Sent: Monday, May 09, 2011 5:16 AM To: antlr-interest@antlr.org Subject: Re: [antlr-interest] Source code level of ANTLRWorks The path field expects a directory where it can find the javac binary in. Adding flags behind the directory also fails: The debugger fails to initialize and leaves some process running in the background requiring me to kill the process before I can try to run the debugger again. Any more thoughts? Ben 2011/5/5 Jim Idle j...@temporal-wave.com Have you tried adding it in with the PATH? Also you can use -source 1.6 -target jsr14 and use 1.6 input and 1.4 output. Jim -Original Message- From: antlr-interest-boun...@antlr.org [mailto:antlr-interest- boun...@antlr.org] On Behalf Of Ben Corne Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2011 4:58 AM To: antlr-interest@antlr.org Subject: Re: [antlr-interest] Source code level of ANTLRWorks Here's a screenshot of my antlrworks preferences page + javac info http://igor.rave.org/antlrjavac.png I don't see the option where to adjust the commandline call. And from what I think to understand from the helppage of my javac, it says 1.4 is the default, but I don't find a way to change this default, except by writing a wrapper shell script that attaches -source 1.5 (which is what I will do now, until more clues are given) Ben 2011/5/4 Jim Idle j...@temporal-wave.com That just means you are calling a compiler that has a default level less than 1.5. So, chance the javacc command in the preferences or remove the old compiler and install 1.6, or makes sure that 1.6 is the first on the command line. ANTLR works does not influence the Java compiler - it only calls the one that you tell it to. Jim -Original Message- From: antlr-interest-boun...@antlr.org [mailto:antlr-interest- boun...@antlr.org] On Behalf Of Ben Corne Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 6:56 AM To: antlr-interest@antlr.org Subject: [antlr-interest] Source code level of ANTLRWorks Hi Is there a way to set the source code level of antlrworks? I've checked the preferences pane and launchers with no avail. I need to set it to 1.5, since I'm using Java Generics: [15:47:58] 102. ERROR in /home/bcorne/Downloads/at2-parser- 3/grammar/output/ATGrammar3Lexer.j ava (at line 114) [15:47:58] StackString paraphrase = new StackString(); [15:47:58] ^^ [15:47:58] Syntax error, parameterized types are only available if source level is 1.5 Regards Ben Corne 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 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 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: 32418] Re: [antlr-interest] Translating expressions - advice?
If the output language has the same operator precedence as the input
language then there is no need to add additional parens. Just preserve the
presence of parens in the input and reflect them in the output:
expression : expr - ^(EXPRESSION expr) ; // In AST will indicate ()
expr : orexpr - orexpr ; // In AST, indicates no ()
...
atom : LPAREN! expression RPAREN! // Yields EXPRESSION node, which means
()
---
expression
: ^(EXPRESSION expr)
;
expr
: ^(AND expr expr)
... etc
| atom
;
atom : INT
| expression // Parens were present
;
If you are trying to remove extraneous parens from the input then you
would need to know the operations on either side of the AND and OR and
decide if the discovered expressions are required. Remember that the
parens are sometimes extraneous but used to clarify and expression
though, so removing them may not be the best thing to do.
Jim
-Original Message-
From: antlr-interest-boun...@antlr.org [mailto:antlr-interest-
boun...@antlr.org] On Behalf Of Hans-Juergen Rennau
Sent: Monday, May 09, 2011 8:16 AM
To: Bart Kiers
Cc: antlr-interest@antlr.orginterest
Subject: Re: [antlr-interest] Translating expressions - advice?
Hi Bart, thank you for considering my question! Indeed, what I wrote
was perhaps misleading. Giving the example
(((a OR b) OR c) AND d)
I meant the result of translating the AST into text in a canonical
way, that is, writing this concatenation:
formula R
: ^(operator ldefOperand rightOperand) = this string: openBracket +
leftOperand + closeBracket + operator + openBracket + rightOperand +
closeBracket
I suppose a deep tree created as sketched in the previous posting, that
is, by the scheme
: operand (operator^ operand)*
can be safely translated by applying the rule given above (R)
recursively. So far, so good. But the brackets are superfluous unless
the current operator has a lower precedence than the operator in the
context, the tree level of which the present operand is a child. For
example, this input
A + B + C + D + E + F
generates
(A + B) + C) + D) + E + F)
So my question amounts to: is it a good idea to accomplish the
translation in these steps:
a) build the AST in the standard way (meant for operation execution),
creating a deep tree with one inner node per operator
b) serialize it using an adapted form of R, which uses or omits the
brackets dependent on a rule parameter providing the context operator
? Or should one build the AST differently, namely, making the top-level
operands of an operator the children of the operator, like:
^('+' A B C D E F)
Thank you, and kind regards
-- Hans-Juergen
Von: Bart Kiers bki...@gmail.com
An: Hans-Juergen Rennau hren...@yahoo.de
CC: antlr-interest@antlr.org interest antlr-interest@antlr.org
Gesendet: Montag, den 9. Mai 2011, 16:16:53 Uhr
Betreff: Re: [antlr-interest] Translating expressions - advice?
Wait I think I misunderstood. Your example `(a OR (b OR (c AND d)))` is
just an example expression, right?
In that case, yes, these parenthesis are part of the token stream, but
if you apply rewrite rules (or AST operators `^` and `!`) properly,
these parenthesis are easily removed from your parse tree.
See: http://www.antlr.org/wiki/display/ANTLR3/Tree+construction
or: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/4931346/how-to-output-the-ast-
built-using-antlr
Regards,
Bart.
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 4:10 PM, Bart Kiers bki...@gmail.com wrote:
I get the impression you think that when creating AST's, ANTLR inserts
parenthesis (brackets). This is not the case: I guess what you're
seeing is just the tree's `toStringTree()` that displays these
parenthesis to make the hierarchy of the tree apparent.
Or am I misinterpreting your question?
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: 32419] Re: [antlr-interest] Translating expressions - advice?
Optimal placement of parentheses is tricky; as a first step, you want to use
the
form
^('+' A B C D E F )
as long as the operator is associative;
then you want to parenthesize only when required to by changes in operator
precedence; the easiest way is actually to have two versions of each expression
rule, one for top level invocation and one for nested invocation (the nested
versions parenthesize).
--Loring
- Original Message
From: Hans-Juergen Rennau hren...@yahoo.de
To: Bart Kiers bki...@gmail.com
Cc: antlr-interest@antlr.orginterest antlr-interest@antlr.org
Sent: Mon, May 9, 2011 8:16:25 AM
Subject: Re: [antlr-interest] Translating expressions - advice?
Hi Bart, thank you for considering my question! Indeed, what I wrote was
perhaps
misleading. Giving the example
(((a OR b) OR c) AND d)
I meant the result of translating the AST into text in a canonical way,
that
is, writing this concatenation:
formula R
: ^(operator ldefOperand rightOperand) = this string: openBracket +
leftOperand + closeBracket + operator + openBracket + rightOperand +
closeBracket
I suppose a deep tree created as sketched in the previous posting, that is,
by
the scheme
: operand (operator^ operand)*
can be safely translated by applying the rule given above (R) recursively.
So
far, so good. But the brackets are superfluous unless the current operator
has
a
lower precedence than the operator in the context, the tree level of which
the
present operand is a child. For example, this input
A + B + C + D + E + F
generates
(A + B) + C) + D) + E + F)
So my question amounts to: is it a good idea to accomplish the translation
in
these steps:
a) build the AST in the standard way (meant for operation execution),
creating
a
deep tree with one inner node per operator
b) serialize it using an adapted form of R, which uses or omits the
brackets
dependent on a rule parameter providing the context operator
? Or should one build the AST differently, namely, making the top-level
operands
of an operator the children of the operator, like:
^('+' A B C D E F)
Thank you, and kind regards
-- Hans-Juergen
Von: Bart Kiers bki...@gmail.com
An: Hans-Juergen Rennau hren...@yahoo.de
CC: antlr-interest@antlr.org interest antlr-interest@antlr.org
Gesendet: Montag, den 9. Mai 2011, 16:16:53 Uhr
Betreff: Re: [antlr-interest] Translating expressions - advice?
Wait I think I misunderstood. Your example `(a OR (b OR (c AND d)))` is just
an
example expression, right?
In that case, yes, these parenthesis are part of the token stream, but if
you
apply rewrite rules (or AST operators `^` and `!`) properly, these
parenthesis
are easily removed from your parse tree.
See: http://www.antlr.org/wiki/display/ANTLR3/Tree+construction
or:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/4931346/how-to-output-the-ast-built-using-antlr
Regards,
Bart.
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 4:10 PM, Bart Kiers bki...@gmail.com wrote:
I get the impression you think that when creating AST's, ANTLR inserts
parenthesis (brackets). This is not the case: I guess what you're seeing is
just
the tree's `toStringTree()` that displays these parenthesis to make the
hierarchy of the tree apparent.
Or am I misinterpreting your question?
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: 32420] [antlr-interest] Composite grammars: compile error with @header tag.
I have 4 grammar file: lexer L.g, parser P.g and two grammars G1 and G2 (see
below). After running antlr to generate Java files compilation fails:
[mkdir] Created dir: target\classes
[javac] Compiling 10 source files to target\classes
[javac] target\src\example\G1Lexer.java:18: cannot find symbol
[javac] symbol : class G1_L
[javac] location: class G1Lexer
[javac] public G1_L gL;
[javac]^
[javac] target\src\example\G1Lexer.java:9: duplicate class: G1Lexer
[javac] public class G1Lexer extends Lexer {
[javac]^
[javac] target\src\example\G1_L.java:22: cannot access example.G1Lexer
[javac] bad class file: target\src\example\G1Lexer.java
[javac] file does not contain class example.G1Lexer
[javac] Please remove or make sure it appears in the correct
subdirectory of the classpath.
[javac] public G1Lexer gG1;
[javac]^
[javac] 3 errors
The workaround would be to move @lexer::header file to both G1.g and G2.g.
It works but the solution has 2 drawbacks:
1. Code duplication.
2. L.java can not be compiled as standalone file anymore because it lacks
package declaration.
==L.g
lexer grammar L;
@lexer::header {
package example;
}
IDENT : 'A-Z' +
;
==P.g==
parser grammar P ;
tokens {
BEGIN = 'begin';
END = 'end';
}
method: BEGIN IDENT END;
G1.g ==
grammar G1 ;
import L,P;
tokens {
PROGRAM = 'program';
}
@header {
package example;
}
program: PROGRAM method;
===G2.g=
grammar G2 ;
import L,P;
tokens {
FUNCTION = 'function';
}
@header {
package example;
}
function: FUNCTION method;
==
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: 32421] [antlr-interest] Feature Request - Visualize the Parse Graph for multiple rules by Rule Decisions and Tokens consumed
Feature Request: A way to visualize the Parse Graph of a grammar by the sequence of Tokens consumed by the rules. The Parse Graph should be generated by selecting a rule or rule decision and using the contextual menu or the Grammar menu. The root of the Parse Graph should be the start of the selected rule or decision. The Parse Graph should visually represent the flow of control in the parser generated by a grammar starting from the selected rule or decision. The Parse Graph should show the rules, rule decisions and the Tokens or user provided Predicates that determine which path is followed. A decision invoking a Sub-rule should be inlined until a leading Token or predicate is found. Antlr generated predicates should list the Tokens in the follow set that trigger that predicate. If the set is more than 2-3 Tokens then do not list the tokens in the graph node but instead have a label that refers to a named list of tokens added to the bottom of the Parse Graph diagram. User provided predicates should be shown as a node named by the predicate function with a label indicating the line number of the predicate in the grammar. Predicate Nodes should distinguish between Syntactic, Semantic and Gated Predicates The graph generation should have an option to limit the depth of analysis so the generated graph will be small enough for a person to read. If analysis is terminated by the depth limit, then that should be visually indicated by adding an Ellipsis node as a terminal leaf node. The graph generation should also honor the current printer page setup and margins. If a diagram would be wider than the current page margins it should be wrapped to another line. The output should be a PS, PDF or Dot file with display and save options like the existing Rule Dependency and Syntax Diagram graphs. The graph should be formatted like a Pascal Railroad Diagram similar to the existing Syntax Diagrams instead of free-form like the Rule-Dependency-Graph. The resulting graph should be suitable for use as formal language documentation for the language parsed by the grammar. i.e. If the grammar was for the Pascal language, selecting the Program rule would generate a railroad diagram for the Pascal Language that would look like a more detailed version of the diagrams found in every elementary Pascal textbook. 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.
