This has gotten large and was cluttering `feed_tok`. This also provides the
ability to more easily expand into other types of tracing in the future.
DEV-7145
This information is likely redundant in a lowering pipeline, but is more
useful outside of such a pipeline. It's also more clear.
`Object` does not implement `Display`, though, because that's too burdensome
for how it's currently used. Many `Object`s are also `Token`s though and,
if fed to another `Parser` for lowering, it'll get `Display::fmt`'d.
DEV-7145
Rust was warning that `cfg` was unused if both `test` and
`parser-trace-stderr`. This both allows that and adjusts the precedence to
make more sense for tests.
DEV-7145
Because of recovery, the trace otherwise paints a really confusing-looking
picture when given unexpected input.
This is large enough now that it really ought to be extracted from
`feed_tok`, but I'll wait to see how this evolves further. I considered
adding color too, but it's not yet clear to me that the visual noise will be
all that helpful.
DEV-7145
This flag allows toggling the parser trace that was previously only
available to tests. Unfortunately, at the time of writing, Cargo cannot
enable flags in profiles, so I have to check for either `test` or this flag
being set to enable relevant features.
This trace is useful as I start to run the parser against existing code
written in TAME so that our existing systems can help to guide my
development. Unlike the current tests, it also allows seeing real-world
data as part of the lowering pipeline, where multiple `Parser`s are in
play.
Having this feature flag also makes this feature more easily discoverable to
those wishing to observe how the lowering pipeline works.
DEV-7145
impl for `&Token` instead of Token; the writer is just copying data into the
destination stream anyway.
This will allow us to continue writing the token while also using it for
further processing, like `tee`.
DEV-7145
We need to be able to export generated identifiers. Trying to figure out a
syntax for this was a bit tricky considering how much is generated, so I
just settled on something that's reasonably clear and easy to parse with
`macro_rules!`.
I had intended to just make everything public by default and encapsulate
using private modules, but that then required making everything else that it
uses public (e.g. error and token objects), which would have been a bizarre
thing to do in e.g. test cases.
DEV-7145
Values can be parsed using `TryFrom<Attr>`. Previously only `From<Attr>`
was supported, which could not fail.
This is critical for parsing values into types, which will wrap `SymbolId`
to provide data assurances.
DEV-7145
The tests had certain things in scope, but now that I'm trying to use it
outside of those modules, some fixes are needed.
This is admittedly a sloppy commit, with a number of miscellaneous fixes. I
didn't bother separating it more because most of them are type fixes, and
the `From<Attr>` stuff is going to have to change into, likely,
`TryFrom<Attr>` so that parse failures can occur when attributes do not
match certain patterns.
DEV-7145
The only additional information needed was opening spans so that we can
provide useful information regarding closing tags.
This uses a generic Span in place of {Open,Close}Span because the latter
wasn't necessary, but more descriptive types would be nice; it may be
beneficial later on to introduce newtypes for each of the span generated by
{Open,Close}Span.
DEV-7145
This was a TODO for the attribute parser generator. The first attribute
will be kept and later ones will be ignored, producing an error. Recovery
permits further attribute parsing having ignored the duplicate.
DEV-7145
This allows an element to be repeated by the parent NT. The easiest way I
saw to implement this for now was to abuse the Context to provide a runtime
configuration that would allow the state machine to reset after it has
completed parsing.
This also influences error recovery, in that if we're expecting zero or more
of something, we cannot provide an error for an unexpected name, and instead
must emit a dead state so that the caller can determine what to do.
DEV-7145
This produces useful parse traces that are output as part of a failing test
case. The parser generator macros can be a bit confusing to deal with when
things go wrong, so this helps to clarify matters.
This is _not_ intended to be machine-readable, but it does show that it
would be possible to generate machine-readable output to visualize the
entire lowering pipeline. Perhaps something for the future.
I left these inline in Parser::feed_tok because they help to elucidate what
is going on, just by reading what the trace would output---that is, it helps
to make the method more self-documenting, albeit a tad bit more
verbose. But with that said, it should probably be extracted at some point;
I don't want this to set a precedent where composition is feasible.
Here's an example from test cases:
[Parser::feed_tok] (input IR: XIRF)
| ==> Parser before tok is parsing attributes for `package`.
| | Attrs_(SutAttrsState_ { ___ctx: (QName(None, LocalPart(NCName(SymbolId(46 "package")))), OpenSpan(Span { len: 0, offset: 0, ctx: Context(SymbolId(1 "#!DUMMY")) }, 10)), ___done: false })
|
| ==> XIRF tok: `<unexpected>`
| | Open(QName(None, LocalPart(NCName(SymbolId(82 "unexpected")))), OpenSpan(Span { len: 0, offset: 1, ctx: Context(SymbolId(1 "#!DUMMY")) }, 10), Depth(1))
|
| ==> Parser after tok is expecting opening tag `<classify>`.
| | ChildA(Expecting_)
| | Lookahead: Some(Lookahead(Open(QName(None, LocalPart(NCName(SymbolId(82 "unexpected")))), OpenSpan(Span { len: 0, offset: 1, ctx: Context(SymbolId(1 "#!DUMMY")) }, 10), Depth(1))))
= note: this trace was output as a debugging aid because `cfg(test)`.
[Parser::feed_tok] (input IR: XIRF)
| ==> Parser before tok is expecting opening tag `<classify>`.
| | ChildA(Expecting_)
|
| ==> XIRF tok: `<unexpected>`
| | Open(QName(None, LocalPart(NCName(SymbolId(82 "unexpected")))), OpenSpan(Span { len: 0, offset: 1, ctx: Context(SymbolId(1 "#!DUMMY")) }, 10), Depth(1))
|
| ==> Parser after tok is attempting to recover by ignoring element with unexpected name `unexpected` (expected `classify`).
| | ChildA(RecoverEleIgnore_(QName(None, LocalPart(NCName(SymbolId(82 "unexpected")))), OpenSpan(Span { len: 0, offset: 1, ctx: Context(SymbolId(1 "#!DUMMY")) }, 10), Depth(1)))
| | Lookahead: None
= note: this trace was output as a debugging aid because `cfg(test)`.
DEV-7145
This resolves a TODO by including the name of the element whose attributes
are currently being parsed.
This also frees a parent from having to provide additional context, allowing
Display to be fully delegated when stitching.
DEV-7145
This introduces `Nt := (A | ... | Z);`, where `Nt` is the name of the
nonterminal and `A ... Z` are the inner nonterminals---it produces a parser
that provides a choice between a set of nonterminals.
This is implemented efficiently by understanding the QName that is accepted
by each of the inner nonterminals and delegating that token immediately to
the appropriate parser. This is a benefit of using a parser generator macro
over parser combinators---we do not need to implement backtracking by
letting inner parsers fail, because we know ahead of time exactly what
parser we need.
This _does not_ verify that each of the inner parsers accept a unique QName;
maybe at a later time I can figure out something for that. However, because
this compiles into a `match`, there is no ambiguity---like a PEG parser,
there is precedence in the face of an ambiguous token, and the first one
wins. Consequently, tests would surely fail, since the latter wouldn't be
able to be parsed.
This also demonstrates how we can have good error suggestions for this
parsing framework: because the inner nonterminals and their QNames are known
at compile time, error messages simply generate a list of QNames that are
expected.
The error recovery strategy is the same as previously noted, and subject to
the same concerns, though it may be more appropriate here: it is desirable
for the inner parser to fail rather than retrying, so that the sum parser is
able to fail and, once the Kleene operator is introduced, retry on another
potential element. But again, that recovery strategy may happen to work in
some cases, but'll fail miserably in others (e.g. placing an unknown element
at the head of a block that expects a sequence of elements would potentially
fail the entire block rather than just the invalid one). But more to come
on that later; it's not critical at this point. I need to get parsing
completed for TAME's input language.
DEV-7145
This adds the ability to bind identifiers to represent `OpenSpan` and
`CloseSpan`, available to the `@` and `/` maps. Since identifiers in TAME
originate from attributes, this may not get a whole lot of use, but it's
important to be available.
There is some awkwardness in that the opening span appears to be scoped to
the entire nonterminal, but it's actually only available in the `@`
mapping. I'll change this if it's actually needed; this keeps things simple
for now.
DEV-7145
Since the parsers produce streaming IRs, we need to be able to emit tokens
representing closing delimiters, where they are important.
This notably doesn't use spans; I'll add those next, since they're also
needed for the previous work.
DEV-7145
The comment explains the issue. I don't think the strategy is going to be a
desirable one, but I want to move on and observe in retrospect how it ought
to be handled.
The important part right now is that recovery is accounted for and possible,
which was a long-standing concern.
DEV-7145
This begins generating parsers that are capable of parsing elements. I need
to move on, so this abstraction isn't going to go as far as it could, but
let's see where it takes me.
This was the work that required the recent lookahead changes, which has been
detailed in previous commits.
This initial support is basic, but robust. It supports parsing elements
with attributes and children, but it does not yet support the equivalent of
the Kleene star (`*`). Such support will likely be added by supporting
parsers that are able to recurse on their own definition in tail position,
which will also require supporting parsers that do not add to the stack.
This generates parsers that, like all the other parsers, use enums to
provide a typed stack. Stitched parsers produce a nested stack that is
always bounded in size. Fortunately, expressions---which can nest
deeply---do not need to maintain ancestor context on the stack, and so this
should work fine; we can get away with this because XIRF ensures proper
nesting for us. Statements that _do_ need to maintain such context are not
nested.
This also does not yet support emitting an object on closing tag, which
will be necessary for NIR, which will be a streaming IR that is "near" to
the source XML in structure. This will then be used to lower into AIR for
the ASG, which gives structure needed for further analysis.
More information to come; I just want to get this committed to serve as a
mental synchronization point and clear my head, since I've been sitting on
these changes for so long and have to keep stashing them as I tumble down
rabbit holes covered in yak hair.
DEV-7145
Having the lookahead token generic over the `ParseState` was a pain in the
ass for stitching, since they shared the same token type but not the same
parser. I don't expect there to be any need to be able to infer other
parser-related types for a token of lookahead, so I'd rather just make my
life easier until such a thing is needed.
DEV-7145
Oh what a tortured journey. I had originally tried to avoid formalizing
lookahead for all parsers by pretending that it was only needed for dead
state transitions (that is---states that have no transitions for a given
input token), but then I needed to yield information for aggregation. So I
added the ability to override the token for `Dead` to yield that, in
addition to the token. But then I also needed to yield lookahead for error
conditions. It was a mess that didn't make sense.
This eliminates `ParseStatus::Dead` entirely and fully integrates the
lookahead token in `Parser` that was previously implemented.
Notably, the lookahead token is encapsulated in `TransitionResult` and
unavailable to `ParseState` implementations, forcing them to rely on
`Parser` for recursion. This not only prevents `ParseState` from recursing,
but also simplifies delegation by removing the need to manually handle
tokens of lookahead.
The awkward case here is XIRT, which does not follow the streaming parsing
convention, because it was conceived before the parsing framework. It needs
to go away, but doing so right now would be a lot of work, so it has to
stick around for a little bit longer until the new parser generators can be
used instead. It is a persistent thorn in my side, going against the grain.
`Parser` will immediately recurse if it sees a token of lookahead with an
incomplete parse. This is because stitched parsers will frequently yield a
dead state indication when they're done parsing, and there's no use in
propagating an `Incomplete` status down the entire lowering pipeline. But,
that does mean that the toplevel is not the only thing recursing. _But_,
the behavior doesn't really change, in the sense that it would infinitely
recurse down the entire lowering stack (though there'd be an opportunity to
detect that). This should never happen with a correct parser, but it's not
worth the effort right now to try to force such a thing with Rust's type
system. Something like TLA+ is better suited here as an aid, but it
shouldn't be necessary with clear implementations and proper test
cases. Parser generators will also ensure such a thing cannot occur.
I had hoped to remove ParseStatus entirely in favor of Parsed, but there's a
lot of type inference that happens based on the fact that `ParseStatus` has
a `ParseState` type parameter; `Parsed` has only `Object`. It is desirable
for a public-facing `Parsed` to not be tied to `ParseState`, since consumers
need not be concerned with such a heavy type; however, we _do_ want that
heavy type internally, as it carries a lot of useful information that allows
for significant and powerful type inference, which in turn creates
expressive and convenient APIs.
DEV-7145
*NB: This is the initial change to introduce the token of lookahead, but this
does not fully integrate it. In particular, this is missing from the
stitching/delegation layer.*
This has been a long time coming, I suppose, though I had tried to avoid it
with `Parser::delegate_lookahead`. But the problem with doing that is that
it forced the ParserState to recurse, which both violates that I want no
looping constructs except for the toplevel, and performs additional stack
allocation as it is not in tail position.
The final straw was having to both return an error _and_ an aggregate object
for the attribute parser when an unexpected element is encountered (this
code is not yet committed). One option was to add a recovery object to the
error object, and formalize that, but then we have other concerns; for
example, what if that recovery object triggered an error? We'd have to mask
either the old or the new error. But we wouldn't want to mask either,
because the object causing the error would be the aggregate attributes,
which is _not_ a recovery object, but actual data we want to emit. And so
it's a kluge right off of the bat.
The use of a token of lookahaed is a more traditional approach and has uses
outside of just this one scenario. It'll also allow for the removal of
recursion from the existing ParserStates, and possibly the elimination of
dead state associated data, though I may end up leaving that; more to come.
Rust will also optimize away lookahead storage and processing in Parsers
that do not utilize it.
DEV-7145
I'd feel rather silly if I used `debug_assert!` for the sake of tests and
they weren't actually being run due to optimization settings.
This is just to catch potential future regressions; all is well today.
DEV-7145
There was only one test outside of the `parse` module using these
fields. The next commit will be introducing lookahead, and I do not want to
have to trust callers to ensure invariants are met.
DEV-7145
This reverts commit b973d36862.
Alright, I'm getting sick of fighting with myself on this. But rather than
just removing the last commit, I'm going to keep it around, so that my
thoughts are clearly documented for my future quarrels with myself.
Firstly: this added more overhead than I wanted it to. While it wasn't
significant, it did add 100--150ms to one of our largest systems, up from
~2.8s, which seems a bit much for a token that's really just meant to make
life easier for the parser.
Further, it seems that all I've managed to do is push my original problem to
a different layer---this started as a means to resolve having to emit both
an object and an error simultaneously in the case where aggregate attribute
parsing has completed, but we encounter an error on the next token (e.g. an
unexpected element). But XIRF, if it's missing AttrEnd, should throw an
error, but should also recover. Recovery is easy---just assume that it was
present---_but then we don't emit a XIRF `AttrEnd` token_, which is
necessary for downstream systems. So we'd need to either:
(a) emit both a token and an error; or
(b) panic.
But if we're doing (a), then the need for `AttrEnd` goes away, because it
solves the original problem (though the other concerns of the previous
commit still stand). (b) is not ideal at all, even though the missing token
does represent an internal system error; it's not something the user can
correct. But, given that it's something that the user cannot correct,
doesn't that imply that it's an awkward thing to include in the token
stream? So back to `AttrEnd` being an awkward PITA to have.
So, given (a), I'll just do that: errors will become more of a "hey, this
error just occurred, but I'm trying to recover---here's an object that you
should use if you choose to continue parsing, but it may or may not be what
you're looking for; proceed with caution". That flips the original script:
I imagined having external systems feed recovery tokens, but this
encapsulates recovery within the parser, which really is more appropriate,
though less flexible than having an omniscient external recovery system;
such a monolith was always an awkward concept and would be difficult to
implement cleanly.
This can also potentially be implemented as a generalization of the Dead
state change that allowed an object to be emitted alongside the
lookahead/error.
Anyway, back to where I was...I'm sure I'll look back on this in the future
shaking my head, reflecting on how naive I was.
DEV-7145
AttrEnd was initially removed in
0cc0bc9d5a (and the commit prior), because
there was not a compelling reason to use it over a lookahead
operation (returning a token via the a dead state transition); `AttrEnd`
simply introduced inconsistencies between the XIR reader (which produced
AttrEnd) and internal XIR stream generators (e.g. the lowering operations
into XIR->XML, which do not).
But now that parsers are performing aggregation---in particular the
attribute parser-generator `xir::parse::attr`---this has become quite a
pain, because the dead state is an actionable token. For example:
1. Open
2. Attr
3. Attr
4. Open
5. ...
In the happy case, token #4 results in `Parsed::Incomplete`, and so can just
be transformed into the object representing the aggregated attributes. But
even in this happy path, it's ugly, and it requires non-tail recursion on
the parser which requires a duplicate stack allocation for the
`ParserState`. That violates a core principle of the system.
But if there is an error at #4---e.g. an unexpected element---then we no
longer have a `Parsed::Incomplete` to hijack for our own uses, and we'd have
to introduce the ability to return both an error and a token, or we'd have
to introduce the ability to keep a token of lookahead instead of reading
from the underlying token stream, but that's complicated with push parsers,
which are used for parser composition. Yikes.
And furthermore, the aggregation has caused me to introduce the ability to
override the dead state type to introduce both a token of lookahead and
aggregation information. This complicates the system and is going to be
confusing to others.
Given all of this, AttrEnd does now seem appropriate to reintroduce, since
it will allow processing of aggregate operations when encountering that
token without having to worry about the above scenario; without having to
duplicate a `ParseState` stack; without having to hijack dead state
transitions for producing our aggregate object; and everything else
mentioned above.
This commit does not modify those abstractions to use AttrEnd yet; it
re-introduces the token to the core system, not the parser-generators, and
it doesn't yet replace lookahead operations in the parsers that use
them. That'll come next. Unlike the commit that removed it, though, we are
now generating proper spans, so make note of that here. This also does not
introduce the concept to XIRF yet, which did not exist at the time that it
was removed, so XIRF is filtering it out until a following commit.
DEV-7145
This is not longer needed after the previous commit, with static spans
having been replaced by `const` spans.
This used to be required before Rust acquired better const features, and
before I had preinterned symbols.
DEV-7145
This isn't conceptally all that significant of a change, but there was a lot
of modify to get it working. I would generally separate this into a commit
for the implementation and another commit for the integration, but I decided
to keep things together.
This serves a role similar to AttrSpan---this allows deriving a span
representing the element name from a span representing the entire XIR
token. This will provide more useful context for errors---including the tag
delimiter(s) means that we care about the fact that an element is in that
position (as opposed to some other type of node) within the context of an
error. However, if we are expecting an element but take issue with the
element name itself, we want to place emphasis on that instead.
This also starts to consider the issue of span contexts---a blob of detached
data that is `Span` is useful for error context, but it's not useful for
manipulation or deriving additional information. For that, we need to
encode additional context, and this is an attempt at that.
I am interested in the concept of providing Spans that are guaranteed to
actually make sense---that are instantiated and manipulated with APIs that
ensure consistency. But such a thing buys us very little, practically
speaking, over what I have now for TAMER, and so I don't expect to actually
implement that for this project; I'll leave that for a personal
project. TAMER's already take a lot of my personal interests and it can
cause me a lot of grief sometimes (with regards to letting my aspirations
cause me more work).
DEV-7145
Non-attribute and non-empty start/end tags will have their whitespace
as part of the produced span. This sets us up for a following change that
will allow for deriving the name span from this span given a QName, which
gives us a span that both represents the entire XIR token and allows
deriving the element name.
An accurate token span is necessary for parsing errors where an element was
not expected, while an element name span is more appropriate for issues of
grammar and semantic errors that deal not with the fact that an element was
encountered, but _what_ element was encountered.
DEV-7145
This both adds clarifying tests and corrects the case of `<foo/>`, where the
offset was erroneously off by one---it saw that there were no attributes and
added a byte thinking it'd include `>`, as in `<foo>`.
DEV-7145
This is the first parser generator for the parsing framework. I've been
waiting quite a while to do this because I wanted to be sure that I
understood how I intended to write the attribute parsers manually. Now that
I'm about to start parsing source XML files, it is necessary to have a
parser generator.
Typically one thinks of a parser generator as a separate program that
generates code for some language, but that is not always the case---that
represents a lack of expressiveness in the language itself (e.g. C). Here,
I simply use Rust's macro system, which should be a concept familiar to
someone coming from a language like Lisp.
This also resolves where I stand on parser combinators with respect to this
abstraction: they both accomplish the exact same thing (composition of
smaller parsers), but this abstraction doesn't do so in the typical
functional way. But the end result is the same.
The parser generated by this abstraction will be optimized an inlined in the
same manner as the hand-written parsers. Since they'll be tightly coupled
with an element parser (which too will have a parser generator), I expect
that most attribute parsers will simply be inlined; they exist as separate
parsers conceptually, for the same reason that you'd use parser combinators.
It's worth mentioning that this awkward reliance on dead state for a
lookahead token to determine when aggregation is complete rubs me the wrong
way, but resolving it would involve reintroducing the XIR AttrEnd that I had
previously removed. I'll keep fighting with myself on this, but I want to
get a bit further before I determine if it's worth the tradeoff of
reintroducing (more complex IR but simplified parsing).
DEV-7145
This was missed. It was not possible, using the documentation
alone (without looking at the linked source) to tell what the QName actually
represented, though you could assume by the name.
DEV-7145
This is partly an experiment, but is designed to simplify producing English
sentences in various contexts. It makes use of a not only unstable, but
incomplete, Rust feature---adt_const_params, for a static str const type
parameter. Hopefully that ends up being stabalized.
This uses types, but it's the same as function composition due to Rust's
monomorphization.
DEV-7145
`ParseState` originally required `Default` for use with `mem::take` in
`Parser::feed_tok`. This unfortunately cannot last, since more specialized
parsers require context during initialization in order to provide useful
diagnostic information. (The other option is to require the caller to
augment errors with diagnostic information, but that would have to be
duplicated by every caller and complicates parser composition; I'd prefer
those diagnostic details remain encapsulated.)
Replacing `Default` with `Option` is uglier, but it ends up producing the
same assembly as `mem::take` did, at least at the time of writing. Because
Rust is able to elide unnecessary moves using this implementation, there is
no need for `unwrap_unchecked` or other unsafe methods, which is great,
since it shows that this parsing methodology is viable entirely in safe
Rust.
DEV-7145
Previously, `ParseStatus::Dead` always yielded
`ParseState::Token`. However, I'm working on introducing parsers that
aggregate (parsing XML attributes into structs), and those parsers do not
know that they have completed aggregation until they reach a dead state;
given that, I need to yield additional information at that time.
I played around with a number of alternative ideas, but this ended up being
the cleanest, relative to the effort involved. For example, introducing
another parameter to `ParseStatus::Dead` was too burdensome on APIs that
ought not concern themselves with the possibility of receiving an object in
addition to a lookahead token, since many parsers are not capable of doing
so (given that they map M:(N<=M)).
Another option that I abandoned fairly quickly was having
`is_accepting` (potentially renamed) return an aggregate object, since
that's on the side and didn't feel like it was part of the parsing pipeline.
The intent is to abstract this some in a new `ParseState` method for
delegation + aggregation.
DEV-7145
I'll document it more formally eventually, but this settles on a mix of the
two: square brackets and dashes for intervals, `+` for intersecting lines,
byte offsets below interval endpoints, and names below that.
The docblock for `Span` itself iss still off; I'll probably just take one of
the test cases and paste it there at some point.
DEV-7145
This replaces a tuple with a tuple struct that allows for calculating more
complete span information, such as the span encompassing the entire
attribute and the value span including the surrounding quotes.
This includes logic that ought to be abstracted into `Span` itself, and it's
not as formal as I'd like it to be (e.g. not ensuring context), but this is
a good starting point.
Note that parsers call `Token::span`, which in turn calculates the attribute
span, each time an attribute is encountered during lowering. But Rust does
a good job at optimizing away unnecessary operations, so this didn't have an
observable impact on time.
DEV-7145
Corey Vollmer
Mike Gerwitz