The Usability of Ambiguity Detection Methods for Context-Free Grammars

One way of verifying a grammar is the detection of ambiguities. Ambiguities are not always unwanted, but they can only be controlled if their sources are known. Unfortunately, the ambiguity problem for context-free grammars is undecidable in the general case. Various ambiguity detection methods (ADMs) exist, but they can never be perfect. In this paper we explore three ADMs to test whether they still can be of any practical value: the derivation generator AMBER, the LR(k) test and the Noncanonical Unambiguity test. We benchmarked their implementations on a collection of ambiguous and unambiguous grammars of different sizes and compa

Practical Ambiguity Detection for Context-Free Grammars

The use of unconstrained context-free grammars for generalized parsing techniques has several advantages over traditional grammar classes, but comes with the danger of undiscovered ambiguities. The ambiguity problem for these grammars is undecidable in the general case, but this does not have to be a problem in practice. Our goal is to find ambiguity detection techniques that have sufficient precision and performance to make them suitable for practical use on realistic grammars. We give a short overview of related work, and propose new directions for improvement

Enhancing the LR Parsing Strategy Using Incremental GPLR Parsing Method

Parsers in modern integrated development environments (IDEs) for generalpurpose languages are virtually all of ad hoc, recursive descent variety. While such parsers have many disadvantages when compared with machine-generated LALR(1) parsers but they have two major good qualities: they are not restricted to any finite of lookahead, and in IDE, they can re-parse parts of a file as they change rather than reparsing the entire file. Theoretically, both of these two capabilities can be achieved through variations of the traditional LR parsing techniques, but the traditional LR parsing methods still suffer two irresolvable problems; which are shift-reduce and reduce-reduce conflicts. In this research, we are trying to solve these two drawbacks with preserving the capabilities of the traditional LR parsing techniques. This has been achieved by employing the generalized piecewise LR parsing (GPLR) technique instead of the traditional LR techniques

Finding Counterexamples from Parsing Conflicts

Abstract Writing a parser remains remarkably painful. Automatic parser generators offer a powerful and systematic way to parse complex grammars, but debugging conflicts in grammars can be time-consuming even for experienced language designers. Better tools for diagnosing parsing conflicts will alleviate this difficulty. This paper proposes a practical algorithm that generates compact, helpful counterexamples for LALR grammars. For each parsing conflict in a grammar, a counterexample demonstrating the conflict is constructed. When the grammar in question is ambiguous, the algorithm usually generates a compact counterexample illustrating the ambiguity. This algorithm has been implemented as an extension to the CUP parser generator. The results from applying this implementation to a diverse collection of faulty grammars show that the algorithm is practical, effective, and suitable for inclusion in other LALR parser generators

Reachability and Error Diagnosis in LR(1) Parsers

International audienceGiven an LR(1) automaton, what are the states in which an error can be detected? For each such " error state " , what is a minimal input sentence that causes an error in this state? We propose an algorithm that answers these questions. This allows building a collection of pairs of an erroneous input sentence and a (handwritten) diagnostic message, ensuring that this collection covers every error state, and maintaining this property as the grammar evolves. We report on an application of this technique to the CompCert ISO C99 parser, and discuss its strengths and limitations

Context-Free Grammars: Covers, Normal Forms, and Parsing

This monograph develops a theory of grammatical covers, normal forms and parsing. Covers, formally defined in 1969, describe a relation between the sets of parses of two context-free grammars. If this relation exists then in a formal model of parsing it is possible to have, except for the output, for both grammars the same parser. Questions concerning the possibility to cover a certain grammar with grammars that conform to some requirements on the productions or the derivations will be raised and answered. Answers to these cover problems will be obtained by introducing algorithms that describe a transformation of an input grammar into an output grammar which satisfies the requirements. The main emphasis in this monograph is on transformations of context-free grammars to context-free grammars in some normal form. However, not only transformations of this kind will be discussed, but also transformations which yield grammars which have useful parsing properties

1st doctoral symposium of the international conference on software language engineering (SLE) : collected research abstracts, October 11, 2010, Eindhoven, The Netherlands

The first Doctoral Symposium to be organised by the series of International Conferences on Software Language Engineering (SLE) will be held on October 11, 2010 in Eindhoven, as part of the 3rd instance of SLE. This conference series aims to integrate the different sub-communities of the software-language engineering community to foster cross-fertilisation and strengthen research overall. The Doctoral Symposium at SLE 2010 aims to contribute towards these goals by providing a forum for both early and late-stage Ph.D. students to present their research and get detailed feedback and advice from researchers both in and out of their particular research area. Consequently, the main objectives of this event are: – to give Ph.D. students an opportunity to write about and present their research; – to provide Ph.D. students with constructive feedback from their peers and from established researchers in their own and in different SLE sub-communities; – to build bridges for potential research collaboration; and – to foster integrated thinking about SLE challenges across sub-communities. All Ph.D. students participating in the Doctoral Symposium submitted an extended abstract describing their doctoral research. Based on a good set of submisssions we were able to accept 13 submissions for participation in the Doctoral Symposium. These proceedings present final revised versions of these accepted research abstracts. We are particularly happy to note that submissions to the Doctoral Symposium covered a wide range of SLE topics drawn from all SLE sub-communities. In selecting submissions for the Doctoral Symposium, we were supported by the members of the Doctoral-Symposium Selection Committee (SC), representing senior researchers from all areas of the SLE community.We would like to thank them for their substantial effort, without which this Doctoral Symposium would not have been possible. Throughout, they have provided reviews that go beyond the normal format of a review being extra careful in pointing out potential areas of improvement of the research or its presentation. Hopefully, these reviews themselves will already contribute substantially towards the goals of the symposium and help students improve and advance their work. Furthermore, all submitting students were also asked to provide two reviews for other submissions. The members of the SC went out of their way to comment on the quality of these reviews helping students improve their reviewing skills

1st doctoral symposium of the international conference on software language engineering (SLE) : collected research abstracts, October 11, 2010, Eindhoven, The Netherlands

The first Doctoral Symposium to be organised by the series of International Conferences on Software Language Engineering (SLE) will be held on October 11, 2010 in Eindhoven, as part of the 3rd instance of SLE. This conference series aims to integrate the different sub-communities of the software-language engineering community to foster cross-fertilisation and strengthen research overall. The Doctoral Symposium at SLE 2010 aims to contribute towards these goals by providing a forum for both early and late-stage Ph.D. students to present their research and get detailed feedback and advice from researchers both in and out of their particular research area. Consequently, the main objectives of this event are: – to give Ph.D. students an opportunity to write about and present their research; – to provide Ph.D. students with constructive feedback from their peers and from established researchers in their own and in different SLE sub-communities; – to build bridges for potential research collaboration; and – to foster integrated thinking about SLE challenges across sub-communities. All Ph.D. students participating in the Doctoral Symposium submitted an extended abstract describing their doctoral research. Based on a good set of submisssions we were able to accept 13 submissions for participation in the Doctoral Symposium. These proceedings present final revised versions of these accepted research abstracts. We are particularly happy to note that submissions to the Doctoral Symposium covered a wide range of SLE topics drawn from all SLE sub-communities. In selecting submissions for the Doctoral Symposium, we were supported by the members of the Doctoral-Symposium Selection Committee (SC), representing senior researchers from all areas of the SLE community.We would like to thank them for their substantial effort, without which this Doctoral Symposium would not have been possible. Throughout, they have provided reviews that go beyond the normal format of a review being extra careful in pointing out potential areas of improvement of the research or its presentation. Hopefully, these reviews themselves will already contribute substantially towards the goals of the symposium and help students improve and advance their work. Furthermore, all submitting students were also asked to provide two reviews for other submissions. The members of the SC went out of their way to comment on the quality of these reviews helping students improve their reviewing skills