Semantic predicates are kind of |PrimaryExpression|, not kind of
|PrefixedExpression|. Therefore I extracted a rule for them and
referenced it from the |PrimaryExpression|.
Initializer and rules are now separated in a similar way as JavaScript
statements -- either by a semicolon or a line terminator, possibly with
whitespace and comments mixed in.
One consequence is that the grammars like this are now illegal:
foo = "a" bar = "b"
A semicolon needs to be inserted between the rules:
foo = "a";bar = "b"
I consider this a good change as the now-illegal syntax was somewhat
confusing.
This makes the |Primary| rule a bit more tidy. Also, matching the |.|
character really belongs to the lexical part of the grammar, next to
literals and character classes.
* Rename the |Action| rule to |CodeBlock| (it better describes what
the rule matches).
* Implement the rule in a simpler way and move it after more basic
lexical elements.
This change has two side effects:
* Label names can no longer be JavaScript reserved words.
* |$| is allowed again in label names. However, because of the
preference rules, names starting with it will be usually parsed as a
text operator followed by another identifier (denoting a rule
reference or label name).
Before this commit, whitespace was handled at the lexical level by
making tokens consume any whitespace coming after them. This was
accomplished by appending |__| to every token rule.
This commit changes whitespace handling to be more explicit. Tokens no
longer consume whitespace coming after them and syntactic rules have to
cope with it. While this slightly complicates the syntactic grammar, I
think it's a cleaner way. Moreover, it is what JavaScript example
grammar does.
One small side-effect of thich change is that the grammar is now
stand-alone (it doesn't require utils.js anymore).
When rule names are capitalized, it's easier to visually distinguish
them from non-capitalized label names. Moreover, I use capitalized rule
names in all my grammars these days.
Before this commit, a line continuation (backslash followed by a line
terminator character) contributed a character to a string or a character
class it was used in. In JavaScript and many other languages, line
continuation doesn't contribute anything.
This commit aligns PEG.js line continuation behavior with JavaScript.
Before this commit, the value of the |rawText| property of "class" AST
nodes was created in a hackish way from processed input and it didn't
always exactly represent the actual input text.
This commit changes the code so that the value of the |rawText| property
is created using the |text| function. This is a clean way which also
resolves the exact representation problem.
Before this commit, the |expected| and |error| functions didn't halt the
parsing immediately, but triggered a regular match failure. After they
were called, the parser could backtrack, try another branches, and only
if no other branch succeeded, it triggered an exception with information
possibly based on parameters passed to the |expected| or |error|
function (this depended on positions where failures in other branches
have occurred).
While nice in theory, this solution didn't work well in practice. There
were at least two problems:
1. Action expression could have easily triggered a match failure later
in the input than the action itself. This resulted in the
action-triggered failure to be shadowed by the expression-triggered
one.
Consider the following example:
integer = digits:[0-9]+ {
var result = parseInt(digits.join(""), 10);
if (result % 2 === 0) {
error("The number must be an odd integer.");
return;
}
return result;
}
Given input "2", the |[0-9]+| expression would record a match
failure at position 1 (an unsuccessful attempt to parse yet another
digit after "2"). However, a failure triggered by the |error| call
would occur at position 0.
This problem could have been solved by silencing match failures in
action expressions, but that would lead to severe performance
problems (yes, I tried and measured). Other possible solutions are
hacks which I didn't want to introduce into PEG.js.
2. Triggering a match failure in action code could have lead to
unexpected backtracking.
Consider the following example:
class = "[" (charRange / char)* "]"
charRange = begin:char "-" end:char {
if (begin.data.charCodeAt(0) > end.data.charCodeAt(0)) {
error("Invalid character range: " + begin + "-" + end + ".");
}
// ...
}
char = [a-zA-Z0-9_\-]
Given input "[b-a]", the |charRange| rule would fail, but the
parser would try the |char| rule and succeed repeatedly, resulting
in "b-a" being parsed as a sequence of three |char|'s, which it is
not.
This problem could have been solved by using negative predicates,
but that would complicate the grammar and still wouldn't get rid of
unintuitive behavior.
Given these problems I decided to change the semantics of the |expected|
and |error| functions. They don't interact with regular match failure
mechanism anymore, but they cause and immediate parse failure by
throwing an exception. I think this is more intuitive behavior with less
harmful side effects.
The disadvantage of the new approach is that one can't backtrack from an
action-triggered error. I don't see this as a big deal as I think this
will be rarely needed and one can always use a semantic predicate as a
workaround.
Speed impact
------------
Before: 993.84 kB/s
After: 998.05 kB/s
Difference: 0.42%
Size impact
-----------
Before: 1019968 b
After: 975434 b
Difference: -4.37%
(Measured by /tools/impact with Node.js v0.6.18 on x86_64 GNU/Linux.)
Before this commit, the |?| operator returned an empty string upon
unsuccessful match. This commit changes the returned value to |null|. It
also updates the PEG.js grammar and the example grammars, which used the
value returned by |?| quite often.
Returning |null| is possible because it no longer indicates a match
failure.
I expect that this change will simplify many real-world grammars, as an
empty string is almost never desirable as a return value (except some
lexer-level rules) and it is often translated into |null| or some other
value in action code.
Implements part of #198.
Implement a new syntax to extract matched strings from expressions. For
example, instead of:
identifier = first:[a-zA-Z_] rest:[a-zA-Z0-9_]* { return first + rest.join(""); }
you can now just write:
identifier = $([a-zA-Z_] [a-zA-Z0-9_]*)
This is useful mostly for "lexical" rules at the bottom of many
grammars.
Note that structured match results are still built for the expressions
prefixed by "$", they are just ignored. I plan to optimize this later
(sometime after the code generator rewrite).
Includes:
* Moving the source code from /src to /lib.
* Adding an explicit file list to package.json
* Updating the Makefile.
* Updating the spec and benchmark suites and their READMEs.
Part of a fix for GH-32.
PEG.js source code becomes a set of Node.js modules that include each
other as needed. The distribution version is built by bundling these
modules together, wrapping them inside a bit of boilerplate code that
makes |module.exports| and |require| work.
Part of a fix for GH-32.
When the Git repository will be a npm package, there will be no
preprocessing step and thus no @VERSION substitution. Let's get rid of
it.
Part of a fix for GH-32.
Change the value of the |name| property of |PEG.GrammarError| instances
from "PEG.GrammarError" to just "GrammarError". This better reflects the
fact that PEG.js can get required under different name than "PEG".
Before this commit, generated parser were able to start parsing from any
rule. This was nice, but it made rule code inlining impossible.
Since this commit, the list of allowed start rules has to be specified
explicitly using the |allowedStartRules| option of the |PEG.buildParser|
method (or the --allowed-start-rule option on the command-line). These
rules will be excluded from inlining when it's implemented.
"modelled" is a British variant, "modeled" an US one. PEG.js officially
uses American English.
Based on pull request by John Gietzen:
https://github.com/dmajda/pegjs/pull/102
This commit replaces the |startRule| parameter of the |parse| method in
generated parsers with more generic |options| -- an options object. This
options object can be used to pass custom options to the parser because
it is visible as the |options| variable inside parser code.
The start rule can now be specified as the |startRule| option. This
means you have to replace all calls like:
parser.parse("input", "myStartRule");
with
parser.parse("input", { startRule: "myStartRule" });
Closes GH-37.
The purpose of this change is to avoid the need to index register
variables storing match results of sequences whose elements are labeled.
The indexing happened when match results of labeled elements were passed
to action/predicate functions.
In order to avoid indexing, the register allocator needs to ensure that
registers storing match results of any labeled sequence elements are
still "alive" after finishing parsing of the sequence. They should not
be used to store anything else at least until code of all actions and
predicates that can see the labels is executed. This requires that the
|allocateRegisters| pass has the knowledge of scoping. Because that
knowledge was already implicitly embedded in the |coputeParams| pass,
the logical step to prevent duplication was to merge it with the
|allocateRegisters| pass. This is what this commit does.
As a part of the merge the tests of both passes were largely refactored.
This is both to accomodate the merge and to make the tests in sync with
the code again (the tests became a bit out-of-sync during the last few
commits -- they tested more than was needed).
The speed/size impact is slightly positive:
Speed impact
------------
Before: 849.86 kB/s
After: 858.16 kB/s
Difference: 0.97%
Size impact
-----------
Before: 876618 b
After: 875602 b
Difference: -0.12%
(Measured by /tools/impact with Node.js v0.6.18 on x86_64 GNU/Linux.)
This commit changes the model underlying parser variables used to store
match results and parse positions. Until now they were treated as a
stack, now they are thought of as registers. The actual behavior does
not change (yet), only the terminology.
More specifically, this commit:
* Changes parser variable names from |result0|, |result1|, etc. to
|r0|, |r1|, etc.
* Changes various internal names and comments to match the new model.
* Renames the |computeVarIndices| pass to |allocateRegisters|.
One stack is conceptually simpler, requires less code and will make a
transition to a register-based machine easier.
Note that the stack variables are now named a bit incorrectly
(|result0|, |result1|, etc. even when they store also parse positions).
I didn't bother with renaming because a transition to a register-based
machine will follow soon and the names will change anyway.
The speed/size impact is insignificant.
Speed impact
------------
Before: 839.05 kB/s
After: 839.67 kB/s
Difference: 0.07%
Size impact
-----------
Before: 949783 b
After: 961578 b
Difference: 1.24%
(Measured by /tools/impact with Node.js v0.6.18 on x86_64 GNU/Linux.)
Before this commit, each node was responsible for computing the value of
its |resultIndex| property in the |computeVarIndices| pass. This was
possible because |resultIndex| was always equal to |index.result|,
meaning that nodes always wrote their match results to the top of the
stack.
This behavior would cause problems in the future where nodes will use
the stack also for storing positions. Parent nodes storing position on
the stack would have to copy their childs' match results from the top of
the stack to some position below where parent's match result would be
expected. There would be no way to tell the children to place their
match result somewhere else than the top of the stack and avoid copying.
This commit fixes the described problem by shifting the responsibility
for setting the value of node's |resultIndex| property to its parent.
This way it can direct its child to place its result wherever it wants
to.
This commit replaces all variable name computations in |computeVarNames|
and |computeParams| passes by computations of indices. The actual names
are computed later in the |generateCode| pass.
This change makes the code generator the only place that deals with the
actual variable names, making them easier to change for example.
The code generator code seems bit more complicated after the change, but
this complexity will pay off (and mostly disappear) later.
David Majda
David Majda
Almad