From puellula at gmail.com  Sun Jan  1 07:05:33 2006
From: puellula at gmail.com (Sara)
Date: Sun, 1 Jan 2006 13:05:33 +0100
Subject: [grammarians] Happy New Year
Message-ID: <001401c60ecb$ac8bc970$6401a8c0@trudy>

happy new year!

puellula
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rubygrammar-grammarians/attachments/20060101/51e48718/attachment-0001.htm

From mental at rydia.net  Sun Jan 22 08:11:06 2006
From: mental at rydia.net (MenTaLguY)
Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 08:11:06 -0500
Subject: [grammarians] progress?
Message-ID: <1137935467.16551.18.camel@localhost.localdomain>

Hey there grammarians,

I've been pretty heavily distracted as of late, but I'd like to get back
to the grammar test suite soon.  How are those grammars doing?

-mental


From puellula at gmail.com  Sun Jan 22 08:54:17 2006
From: puellula at gmail.com (Sara)
Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 14:54:17 +0100
Subject: [grammarians] progress?
References: <1137935467.16551.18.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Message-ID: <008e01c61f5b$5810aa50$6401a8c0@trudy>

HI!
My Grammar is in development! :)
I have any problem with ANTLR thing... I don't know how I can declare Global 
Variable because if I write in my grammar:

program: {String s = new String();}...

I see this only in "program" in the P.java file. I don't know if you 
understand me! [pardon my English!]
Now I'm realizing this:
I give to my Java program this (for example) Ruby code:

class A
  def initialize
    @a = 0
  end
end
My result will be this in memory:

new Programma(
  new ClassDef(new ClassName("A"), new ClassName("Object"),
    new ClassBody(
      new MethodDef(new MethodName("initialize"), new Parameter[]{},
         new Body(new Assign(new FieldName("a"), new Int(0)))
                   )
                 )
              )
             )
I'm stop for some problems for how I can create this. I'm in a good point, 
but for the moment I have some problems :(

Thank you,
bye bye
puellula


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "MenTaLguY" <mental at rydia.net>
To: "Grammarians" <rubygrammar-grammarians at rubyforge.org>
Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2006 2:11 PM
Subject: [grammarians] progress?


> Hey there grammarians,
>
> I've been pretty heavily distracted as of late, but I'd like to get back
> to the grammar test suite soon.  How are those grammars doing?
>
> -mental
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rubygrammar-grammarians mailing list
> Rubygrammar-grammarians at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rubygrammar-grammarians 


From mental at rydia.net  Sun Jan 22 11:22:27 2006
From: mental at rydia.net (MenTaLguY)
Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 11:22:27 -0500
Subject: [grammarians] progress?
In-Reply-To: <008e01c61f5b$5810aa50$6401a8c0@trudy>
References: <1137935467.16551.18.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<008e01c61f5b$5810aa50$6401a8c0@trudy>
Message-ID: <1137946948.16551.32.camel@localhost.localdomain>

On Sun, 2006-01-22 at 14:54 +0100, Sara wrote:
> I'm stop for some problems for how I can create this. I'm in a good point, 
> but for the moment I have some problems :(

Unfortunately, I'm not very skilled with ANTLR yet.  I suspect you don't
need a global variable -- at most just a member variable in the parser
instead -- but I don't know the best way to approach it.

Maybe you could ask on the antlr-interest list:

 http://www.antlr.org:8080/mailman/listinfo/antlr-interest

-mental


From mtraverso at gmail.com  Mon Jan 23 15:37:01 2006
From: mtraverso at gmail.com (Martin Traverso)
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 12:37:01 -0800
Subject: [grammarians] progress?
In-Reply-To: <1137935467.16551.18.camel@localhost.localdomain>
References: <1137935467.16551.18.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Message-ID: <82b9e79a0601231237x610bfc9dh144f5703112b0385@mail.gmail.com>

Hey!

I made a lot of progress a few days back, but then got distracted by work :)

I still have a long way to go, but the grammar can now parse most of the
higher-level constructs (control flow statements, class/method/module defs,
expressions, etc). It even builds ASTs.

The remaining changes fall roughly in these areas:
- heredocs
- dynamic strings and symbols
- parsing %q, %Q, %w strings and arrays
- assignments (they sort of work, but are not fully fleshed out yet)
- support un-parenthesized method calls
- regexps


Martin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rubygrammar-grammarians/attachments/20060123/f11b333e/attachment.htm

From mental at rydia.net  Mon Jan 23 17:13:18 2006
From: mental at rydia.net (mental@rydia.net)
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 17:13:18 -0500
Subject: [grammarians] Line breaking in Ruby can be dangerous
In-Reply-To: <m21wyzxcrn.fsf@gmail.com>
References: <2a1c4dc20601230439i68921e6apef4fb1d9877da37@mail.gmail.com>
	<m21wyzxcrn.fsf@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1138054398.43d554fe80ae1@www.rydia.net>

Quoting Christian Neukirchen <chneukirchen at gmail.com>:

> That's because you can have multiple statements in (), e.g.:
>
> (puts "foo"
> puts "bar")
>
> #=> foo
> #=> bar

Whoa.

-mental

From mental at rydia.net  Mon Jan 23 17:44:36 2006
From: mental at rydia.net (mental@rydia.net)
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 17:44:36 -0500
Subject: [grammarians] progress?
In-Reply-To: <82b9e79a0601231237x610bfc9dh144f5703112b0385@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1137935467.16551.18.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<82b9e79a0601231237x610bfc9dh144f5703112b0385@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1138056276.43d55c54be1af@www.rydia.net>

Quoting Martin Traverso <mtraverso at gmail.com>:

> Hey!
>
> I made a lot of progress a few days back, but then got distracted
> by work :)
>
> I still have a long way to go, but the grammar can now parse most
> of the higher-level constructs (control flow statements,
> class/method/module defs, expressions, etc). It even builds ASTs.

Great!  Nice work, fellow!  Keep it up!

-mental

From mtraverso at gmail.com  Mon Jan 23 17:45:21 2006
From: mtraverso at gmail.com (Martin Traverso)
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 14:45:21 -0800
Subject: [grammarians] Line breaking in Ruby can be dangerous
In-Reply-To: <1138054398.43d554fe80ae1@www.rydia.net>
References: <2a1c4dc20601230439i68921e6apef4fb1d9877da37@mail.gmail.com>
	<m21wyzxcrn.fsf@gmail.com> <1138054398.43d554fe80ae1@www.rydia.net>
Message-ID: <82b9e79a0601231445w7ac65a23k824e327e7cb3392@mail.gmail.com>

>
> > That's because you can have multiple statements in (), e.g.:
> >
> > (puts "foo"
> > puts "bar")
> >
>


I thought my grammar would handle that case, but I somehow missed it.
Anyway, I just checked in a fix for it. It was just a matter of changing:

'(' conditional_statement ')'
to
'(' compound_statement ')'

:)

Martin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rubygrammar-grammarians/attachments/20060123/7a965a5e/attachment.htm

From suk at pobox.com  Mon Jan 30 23:50:35 2006
From: suk at pobox.com (Peter Suk)
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 22:50:35 -0600
Subject: [grammarians] I have a LALR definition that compiles with 0
	conflicts
Message-ID: <db98d50fa47e4782621d41ada0f97e70@pobox.com>

Howdy folks,

I have an LALR(1) grammar and lexer definition derived by machine 
translation of the middle section of Matz's parse.y that compiles with 
0 conflicts.  However, I suspect that many of these conflicts are 
masked by the compiler-compiler's overlapping tokens facility.

In fact, I have just tried an experiment where I "un-overlapped" 
tLPAREN and tLPAREN_ARG (As well as '(' which is implicitly treated as 
a token.)  This resulted in 5 distinct shift-reduce conflicts and 27 
reduce-reduce conflicts.

What progress have the grammarians made?

--Peter


--
There's neither heaven nor hell, save what we grant ourselves.
There's neither fairness nor justice, save what we grant each other.


From suk at pobox.com  Tue Jan 31 10:09:12 2006
From: suk at pobox.com (Peter Suk)
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 09:09:12 -0600
Subject: [grammarians] GLR Parser
In-Reply-To: <db98d50fa47e4782621d41ada0f97e70@pobox.com>
References: <db98d50fa47e4782621d41ada0f97e70@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <8ab88cb017afedb47bebb74293225e74@pobox.com>

Has anyone toyed around with the idea of creating a GLR parser based on 
parse.y?

--
There's neither heaven nor hell, save what we grant ourselves.
There's neither fairness nor justice, save what we grant each other.


From yawl.20481481 at bloglines.com  Tue Jan 31 11:27:37 2006
From: yawl.20481481 at bloglines.com (yawl.20481481@bloglines.com)
Date: 31 Jan 2006 16:27:37 -0000
Subject: [grammarians] I have a LALR definition that compiles with 0
	conflicts
Message-ID: <1138724857.53296683.19826.sendItem@bloglines.com>


> I have an LALR(1) grammar and lexer definition derived by machine 
>
translation of the middle section of Matz's parse.y that compiles with 
>
0 conflicts.  However, I suspect that many of these conflicts are 
> masked
by the compiler-compiler's overlapping tokens facility.

You mean you extracted
BNF from parser.y? Then how do you deal with the lexer, still use the c code?


> In fact, I have just tried an experiment where I "un-overlapped" 
>
tLPAREN and tLPAREN_ARG (As well as '(' which is implicitly treated as 
>
a token.)  This resulted in 5 distinct shift-reduce conflicts and 27 
> reduce-reduce
conflicts.

tLPAREN_ARG and tLPAREN have to be differented to parse the
following code:
puts (1) + (2)

> What progress have the grammarians made?

> 

I am using smoke test to measure my progress. When parsing 1500+ .rb
files from ruby's standard libary, I have 48 failures yesterday.


Xue
Yong Zhi
http://seclib.blogspot.com


From parrt at cs.usfca.edu  Tue Jan 31 14:39:27 2006
From: parrt at cs.usfca.edu (Terence Parr)
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 11:39:27 -0800
Subject: [grammarians] GLR Parser
In-Reply-To: <8ab88cb017afedb47bebb74293225e74@pobox.com>
References: <db98d50fa47e4782621d41ada0f97e70@pobox.com>
	<8ab88cb017afedb47bebb74293225e74@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <596F60BB-048C-455F-9AE5-B2F38B96C263@cs.usfca.edu>


On Jan 31, 2006, at 7:09 AM, Peter Suk wrote:

> Has anyone toyed around with the idea of creating a GLR parser  
> based on
> parse.y?

GLR would be easier to use for building the grammar as it naturally  
deals with ambiguity (which is usually an error, but a "feature" of  
ruby).  THen actions could disambiguate the trees returned from the  
parser.  That said, it's a black-box, which is why people like ANTLR;  
you can see what it generates and debug it. ;)

Ter

From mental at rydia.net  Tue Jan 31 20:49:06 2006
From: mental at rydia.net (MenTaLguY)
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 20:49:06 -0500
Subject: [grammarians] I have a LALR definition that compiles with
	0	conflicts
In-Reply-To: <db98d50fa47e4782621d41ada0f97e70@pobox.com>
References: <db98d50fa47e4782621d41ada0f97e70@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <1138758546.16551.106.camel@localhost.localdomain>

On Mon, 2006-01-30 at 22:50 -0600, Peter Suk wrote:
> What progress have the grammarians made?

We've got a number of different folks working on grammars; I haven't
really been keeping close track.

I think the person furthest along right now is Martin Traverso, who's
got most of the language down except for (as of his last post), multiple
assignment, regexps, and some of the more esoteric quoting constructs
(e.g. heredocs).

His grammar is available here:

 http://www.rubyforge.org/var/svn/rubygrammar/grammars/antlr-v3/trunk

though I don't know how up-to-date the copy there is.

-mental