This was accepting an early EOF when the active child `ParseState` was in an
accepting state, because it was not ensuring that anything on the stack was
also accepting.
Ideally, there should be nothing on the stack, and hopefully in the future
that's what happens. But with how things are today, it's important that, if
anything is on the stack, it is accepting.
Since `is_accepting` on the superstate is only called during finalization,
and because the check terminates early, and because the stack practically
speaking will only have a couple things on it max (unless we're in tail
position in a deeply nested tree, without TCO [yet]), this shouldn't be an
expensive check.
Implementing this did require that we expose `Context` to `is_accepting`,
which I had hoped to avoid having to do, but here we are.
DEV-7145
I'm disappointed that I keep having to implement features that I had hoped
to avoid implementing.
This introduces a "superstate" feature, which is intended really just to be
a sum type that is able to delegate to stitched `ParseState`s. This then
allows a `ParseState` to transition directly to another `ParseState` and
have the parent `ParseState` handle the delegation---a trampoline.
This issue naturally arises out of the recursive nature of parsing a TAME
XML document, where certain statements can be nested (like `<section>`), and
where expressions can be nested. I had gotten away with composition-based
delegation for now because `xmlo` headers do not have such nesting.
The composition-based approach falls flat for recursive structures. The
typical naive solution is boxing, which I cannot do, because not only is
this on an extremely hot code path, but I require that Rust be able to
deeply introspect and optimize away the lowering pipeline as much as
possible.
Many months ago, I figured that such a solution would require a trampoline,
as it typically does in stack-based languages, but I was hoping to avoid
it. Well, no longer; let's just get on with it.
This intends to implement trampolining in a `ParseState` that serves as that
sum type, rather than introducing it as yet another feature to `Parser`; the
latter would provide a more convenient API, but it would continue to bloat
`Parser` itself. Right now, only the element parser generator will require
use of this, so if it's needed beyond that, then I'll debate whether it's
worth providing a better abstraction. For now, the intent will be to use
the `Context` to store a stack that it can pop off of to restore the
previous `ParseState` before delegation.
DEV-7145
"Mixed content" is the XML term representing element nodes mixed with text
nodes. For example, `foo <strong>bar</strong> baz` is mixed.
TAME supports text nodes as documentation, intended to be in a literate
style but never fully realized. In any case, we need to permit them, and I
wanted to do more than just ignore the nodes.
This takes a different approach than typical parser delegation---it has the
parent parser _preempt_ the child by intercepting text before delegation
takes place, rather than having the child reject the token (or possibly
interpret it itself!) and have to handle an error or dead state.
And while this makes it more confusing in terms of state machine stitching,
it does make sense, in the sense that the parent parser is really what
"owns" the text node---the parser is delegating _element_ parsing only, take
asserts authority when necessary to take back control where it shouldn't be
delegated.
DEV-7145
Previously a `Depth` was provided only for `Open` and `Close`. This depth
information, for example, will be used by NIR to quickly determine whether a
given parser ought to assert ownership of a text/comment token rather than
delegating it.
This involved modifying a number of test cases, but it's worth repeating in
these commits that this is intentional---I've been bit in the past using
`..` in contexts where I really do want to know if variant fields change so
that I can consider whether and how that change may affect the code
utilizing that variant.
DEV-7145
This teaches XIRF to optionally refine Text into RefinedText, which
determines whether the given SymbolId represents entirely whitespace.
This is something I've been putting off for some time, but now that I'm
parsing source language for NIR, it is necessary, in that we can only permit
whitespace Text nodes in certain contexts.
The idea is to capture the most common whitespace as preinterned
symbols. Note that this heuristic ought to be determined from scanning a
codebase, which I haven't done yet; this is just an initial list.
The fallback is to look up the string associated with the SymbolId and
perform a linear scan, aborting on the first non-whitespace character. This
combination of checks should be sufficiently performant for now considering
that this is only being run on source files, which really are not all that
large. (They become large when template-expanded.) I'll optimize further
if I notice it show up during profiling.
This also frees XIR itself from being concerned by Whitespace. Initially I
had used quick-xml's whitespace trimming, but it messed up my span
calculations, and those were a pain in the ass to implement to begin with,
since I had to resort to pointer arithmetic. I'd rather avoid tweaking it.
tameld will not check for whitespace, since it's not important---xmlo files,
if malformed, are the fault of the compiler; we can ignore text nodes except
in the context of code fragments, where they are never whitespace (unless
that's also a compiler bug).
Onward and yonward.
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 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
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
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 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
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
`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
This is intended to describe, to the user, the state that the parser is
in. This will be used to convey additional information for general parser
errors, but it should also probably be integrated into parsers' individual
errors as well when appropriate.
This is something I expected to add at some point, but I wanted to add them
because, when dealing with lowering errors, it can be difficult to tell
what parser the error originated from.
DEV-11864
RSG (Ryan Specialty Group) recently announced a rename to Ryan Specialty (no
"Group"), but I'm not sure if the legal name has been changed yet or not, so
I'll wait on that.
This is now visible in the diagnostic output. Example at this point in
time, on an xmlo file for one of our smallest systems:
error: expected closing tag for `preproc:symtable`
--> /home/.../foo.xmlo:16:4
|
| <preproc:symtable xmlns:map="http://www.w3.org/2005/xpath-functions/map">
| -----------------
= note: element `preproc:symtable` is opened here
--> /home/.../foo.xmlo:11326:4
|
| </preproc:wrong>
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
= error: expected `</preproc:symtable>`
DEV-12151
This is a working concept that will continue to evolve. I wanted to start
with some basic output before getting too carried away, since there's a lot
of potential here.
This is heavily influenced by Rust's helpful diagnostic messages, but will
take some time to realize a lot of the things that Rust does. The next step
will be to resolve line and column numbers, and then possibly include
snippets and underline spans, placing the labels alongside them. I need to
balance this work with everything else I have going on.
This is a large commit, but it converts the existing Error Display impls
into Diagnostic. This separation is a bit verbose, so I'll see how this
ends up evolving.
Diagnostics are tied to Error at the moment, but I imagine in the future
that any object would be able to describe itself, error or not, which would
be useful in the future both for the Summary Page and for query
functionality, to help developers understand the systems they are writing
using TAME.
Output is integrated into tameld only in this commit; I'll add tamec
next. Examples of what this outputs are available in the test cases in this
commit.
DEV-10935
This resolves the performance issues caused by Rust's failure to elide the
ElementStack (ArrayVec) memcpys on move.
Since XIRF is invoked tens of millions of times in some cases for larger
systems, prior to this change, failure to optimize away moves for XIRF
resulted in tens of millions of memcpys. This resulted in linking of one
program going from 1s -> ~15s. This change reduces it to ~2.5s with the
wip-xmlo-xir-reader flag on, with the extra time coming from elsewhere (the
subject of future changes).
In particular, this change introduces a new mutable reference to
`ParseState::parse_token`, which is a reference to a `Context` owned by the
caller (e.g. `Parser`). In the case of XIRF, this means that
`Parser<flat::State, _>` will own the `ElementStack`/`ArrayVec` instead of
`flat::State`; this allows the latter to remain pure and benefit from Rust's
move optimizations, without sacrificing the otherwise-pure implementation.
ParseStates that do not need a mutable context can use `NoContext` and
remain pure.
DEV-12024
This introduces a new method similar to the previous `delegate`, but with
another closure that allows for handling lookahead tokens from the child
parser.
Admittedly, this isn't exactly what I was going for---a list of arguments
isn't exactly self-documenting, especially with the brevity when the
arguments line up---but this was easy to do and so I'll run with this for
now.
This also modified `delegate` to accept a context, even though it wasn't
necessary, both for consistency with its lookup counterpart and for brevity
with the `into` argument (allowing, in our case, to just pass the name of
the variant, rather than a closure).
I'm not going to handle the actual starting and accepting state stitching
abstraction for now; I'd like to observe future boilerplate more before I
consider the best way to handle it, though I do have some ideas.
DEV-10863
This does some cleanup and adds `parse::Object` for use in disambiguating
`From` for `ParseStatus`, allowing the `Transition` API to be much more
flexible in the data it accepts and automatically converts. This allows us
to concisely provide raw output data to be wrapped, or provide `ParseStatus`
directly when more convenient.
There aren't yet examples in the docs; I'll do so once I make sure this API
is actually utilized as intended.
DEV-10863
This replaces u8 and will be used for the new XmloReader.
Previously I wasn't sure what direction TAMER was going to go in with
regards to dimensionality, but I do not expect that higher dimensions will
be supported, and if they are, they'd very likely compile down to lower ones
and create an illusion of higher-dimensionality.
Whatever the future holds, it's not used today, and I'd rather these types
be correct.
ASG needs changing too, but one step at a time.
DEV-10863
This converts the tuple type alias into a newtype, so that we may provide
our own implementations.
This differs from a previous approach that I took, which involved making
this type `Result<(S, T), (S, E)>` so that the return values composed well
with other functions. But the reality is that this is used only by other
`ParseState`s and `Parser`, so it's unnecessary.
However, this is also an attempt to utilize the new Try and FromResidual
traits; note how the Try associated types match precisely what I was trying
to do before, though they're used as intermediate types. I'll see how this
evolves.
DEV-10863
This allows the Results to compose and, importantly, is compatible with
`?` without having to put in any extra effort.
This makes puts the caller in an awkward spot, so I introduced a utility
function `result_tup0_invert` for now; we'll see if that stays or evolves
differently.
DEV-10863
This begins to transition XmloReader into a ParseState. Unlike previous
changes where ParseStates were composed into a single ParseState, this is
instead a lowering operation that will take the output of one Parser and
provide it to another.
The mess in ld::poc (...which still needs to be refactored and removed)
shows the concept, which will be abstracted away. This won't actually get
to the ASG in order to test that that this works with the
wip-xmlo-xir-reader flag on (development hasn't gotten that far yet), but
since it type-checks, it should conceptually work.
Wiring lowering operations together is something that I've been dreading for
months, but my approach of only abstracting after-the-fact has helped to
guide a sane approach for this. For some definition of "sane".
It's also worth noting that AsgBuilder will too become a ParseState
implemented as another lowering operation, so:
XIR -> XIRF -> XMLO -> ASG
These steps will all be streaming, with iteration happening only at the
topmost level. For this reason, it's important that ASG not be responsible
for doing that pull, and further we should propagate Parsed::Incomplete
rather than filtering it out and looping an indeterminate number of times
outside of the toplevel.
One final note: the choice of 64 for the maximum depth is entirely
arbitrary and should be more than generous; it'll be finalized at some point
in the future once I actually evaluate what maximum depth is reasonable
based on how the system is used, with some added growing room.
DEV-10863
The parsing framework originally created for XIR is now more general and
useful to other things. We'll see how this evolves.
This needs additional documentation, but I'd like to see how it changes as
I implement XmloReader and then some of the source readers first.
DEV-10863
This adds a `Token` type to `ParseState`. Everything uses `xir::Token`
currently, but `XmloReader` will use `xir::flat::Object`.
Now that this has been generalized beyond XIR, the parser ought to be
hoisted up a level.
DEV-10863
This does a couple of things: it ensures that documents one and only one
root note, and it properly handles dead transitions once parsing is
complete (allowing it to be composed).
This should make XIRF feature-complete for the time being. It does rely on
the assumption that the reader is stripping out any trailing whitespace, so
I guess we'll see if that's true as we proceed.
DEV-10863
XIRF introduced the concept of `Transition` to help document code and
provide mental synchronization points that make it easier to reason about
the system. I decided to hoist this into XIR's parser itself, and have
`parse_token` accept an owned state and require a new state to be returned,
utilizing `Transition`.
Together with the convenience methods introduced on `Transition` itself,
this produces much clearer code, as is evidenced by tree::Stack (XIRT's
parser). Passing an owned state is something that I had wanted to do
originally, but I thought it'd lead to more concise code to use a mutable
reference. Unfortunately, that concision lead to code that was much more
difficult than necessary to understand, and ended up having a net negative
benefit by leading to some more boilerplate for the nested types (granted,
that could have been alleviated in other ways).
This also opens up the possibility to do something that I wasn't able to
before, which was continue to abstract away parser composition by stitching
their state machines together. I don't know if this'll be done immediately,
but because the actual parsing operations are now able to compose
functionally without mutability getting the way, the previous state coupling
issues with the parent parser go away.
DEV-10863
This introduces XIR Flat (XIRF), which is conceptually between XIR and
XIRT. This provides a more appropriate level of abstraction for further
lowering operations to parse against, and removes the need for other parsers
to perform their own validations (inappropriately) to ensure well-formed
XML.
There is still some cleanup worth doing, including moving some of the
parsing responsibility up a level back into the XIR parser.
DEV-10863
Mike Gerwitz