2,138 research outputs found

    Towards Zero-Overhead Disambiguation of Deep Priority Conflicts

    Full text link
    **Context** Context-free grammars are widely used for language prototyping and implementation. They allow formalizing the syntax of domain-specific or general-purpose programming languages concisely and declaratively. However, the natural and concise way of writing a context-free grammar is often ambiguous. Therefore, grammar formalisms support extensions in the form of *declarative disambiguation rules* to specify operator precedence and associativity, solving ambiguities that are caused by the subset of the grammar that corresponds to expressions. **Inquiry** Implementing support for declarative disambiguation within a parser typically comes with one or more of the following limitations in practice: a lack of parsing performance, or a lack of modularity (i.e., disallowing the composition of grammar fragments of potentially different languages). The latter subject is generally addressed by scannerless generalized parsers. We aim to equip scannerless generalized parsers with novel disambiguation methods that are inherently performant, without compromising the concerns of modularity and language composition. **Approach** In this paper, we present a novel low-overhead implementation technique for disambiguating deep associativity and priority conflicts in scannerless generalized parsers with lightweight data-dependency. **Knowledge** Ambiguities with respect to operator precedence and associativity arise from combining the various operators of a language. While *shallow conflicts* can be resolved efficiently by one-level tree patterns, *deep conflicts* require more elaborate techniques, because they can occur arbitrarily nested in a tree. Current state-of-the-art approaches to solving deep priority conflicts come with a severe performance overhead. **Grounding** We evaluated our new approach against state-of-the-art declarative disambiguation mechanisms. By parsing a corpus of popular open-source repositories written in Java and OCaml, we found that our approach yields speedups of up to 1.73x over a grammar rewriting technique when parsing programs with deep priority conflicts--with a modest overhead of 1-2 % when parsing programs without deep conflicts. **Importance** A recent empirical study shows that deep priority conflicts are indeed wide-spread in real-world programs. The study shows that in a corpus of popular OCaml projects on Github, up to 17 % of the source files contain deep priority conflicts. However, there is no solution in the literature that addresses efficient disambiguation of deep priority conflicts, with support for modular and composable syntax definitions

    The design and implementation of Object Grammars

    Get PDF
    An Object Grammar is a variation on traditional BNF grammars, where the notation is extended to support declarative bidirectional mappings between text and object graphs. The two directions for interpreting Object Grammars are parsing and formatting. Parsing transforms text into an object graph by recognizing syntactic features and creating the corresponding object structure. In the reverse direction, formatting recognizes object graph features and generates an appropriate textual presentation. The key to Object Grammars is the expressive power of the mapping, which decouples the syntactic structure from the graph structure. To handle graphs, Object Grammars support declarative annotations for resolving textual names that refer to arbitrary objects in the graph structure. Predicates on the semantic structure provide additional control over the mapping. Furthermore, Object Grammars are compositional so that languages may be defined in a modular fashion. We have implemented our approach to Object Grammars as one of the foundations of the Ens (o) over bar system and illustrate the utility of our approach by showing how it enables definition and composition of domain-specific languages (DSLs). (C) 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.</p
    • …
    corecore