You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Not sure if this would be a good feature or not, but it would aid in AST generation, I think.
Right now generating an AST looks fairly complicated to me. I was thinking that one way to make this easier would be to have a codegen mode where it would generate a set of functions for each rule. The functions would take either an argument containing all of the subrules referenced in that rule (or the raw text if it referred to a token) or would have a list of arguments, with each argument being a referenced subrule or token, and that would mean that all one would need to do to build an AST would be to keep track of where their at on a stack. I'm thinking of something like the following:
Or, as an alternative, the struct would be destructured and passed as individual function arguments. For rules that have alternations, that could be a union. Things like that.
The idea would be that we would "subscribe" to the parser "events", if you will, and then you could just build your AST that way. I believe ANTLR4 does this, as does the Heim parser generator, though I don't use either because ANTLR4 doesn't support this grammar and Heim broke last time I tried. This is the only parser tool that I've found that supports the kind of grammar I'm working with.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Not sure if this would be a good feature or not, but it would aid in AST generation, I think.
Right now generating an AST looks fairly complicated to me. I was thinking that one way to make this easier would be to have a codegen mode where it would generate a set of functions for each rule. The functions would take either an argument containing all of the subrules referenced in that rule (or the raw text if it referred to a token) or would have a list of arguments, with each argument being a referenced subrule or token, and that would mean that all one would need to do to build an AST would be to keep track of where their at on a stack. I'm thinking of something like the following:
Assume we have this rule:
If we were to implement a C++ mode (which would be nice but I can see how that'd be a hassle), it might do something like either:
Or, as an alternative, the struct would be destructured and passed as individual function arguments. For rules that have alternations, that could be a union. Things like that.
The idea would be that we would "subscribe" to the parser "events", if you will, and then you could just build your AST that way. I believe ANTLR4 does this, as does the Heim parser generator, though I don't use either because ANTLR4 doesn't support this grammar and Heim broke last time I tried. This is the only parser tool that I've found that supports the kind of grammar I'm working with.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: