[antlr-interest] Re: High level semantic analysis

lgcraymer lgc at mail1.jpl.nasa.gov
Mon May 19 11:18:09 PDT 2003

My take on this paper is that they are basically translating a 
domain-specific logic language to a procedural one, and that there is 
nothing special here.  At least they used ANTLR (in its PCCTS 
incarnation) for the implementation even if they mention lex and yacc 
in figure 2.

As far as the theorem-proving part of this goes, most of these use the 
"resolution" approach found in any good computer logic text (an intro 
to Prolog would probably discuss this).

As far as better tree rewrite support goes, that is planned for ANTLR 
3.  I haven't yet figured out whether JBURG is useful for this or not: 
 the BURG algorithm works on binary trees, and I have not had the time 
to see if ANTLR syntax trees (abstract syntax trees describe the 
grammar specification; ANTLR syntax trees replace parse trees and 
should probably be labeled "concrete syntax trees" or just "syntax 
trees") can be easily mapped to the binary formalism.  If it can, it 
should be possible to use a set of BURG rules to generate a tree 
rewrite grammar instead of specifying the rewrite manually.


--- In antlr-interest at yahoogroups.com, mzukowski at y... wrote:
> You can use JBurg to do the matching & optimization type stuff.  See 
> lecture http://www.cs.usfca.edu/~parrt/course/652/labs/jburg.html.
> Not sure about how to link in the theorem proving aspect of that 
> though.  RML as described seems like a somewhat incomplete beast 
> from the thesis on the open source modelica implementation.  I 
couldn't find
> too much written about it, maybe I was looking in the wrong places.  
I guess
> I need an example a bit more compelling than addition to see what 
> advantages of RML are.
> Monty
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tiller, Michael (M.M.) [mailto:mtiller at f...] 
> Sent: Monday, May 19, 2003 5:28 AM
> To: 'antlr-interest at yahoogroups.com'
> Subject: [antlr-interest] High level semantic analysis
> I'm not much of an expert on building compilers, but I came across 
> that I thought was quite interesting and I was wondering if anyone 
> would care to comment on the applicability of these ideas to ANTLR.
> Specifically, I recognize the the treewalker functionality in the 
> very nice way to explore and translate ASTs.  I was wondering if 
anybody is
> interested in adding some higher-level functionality like what is 
> in this report:
> http://www.modelica.org/papers/scs98sem.pdf
> --
> Mike
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 

More information about the antlr-interest mailing list