[antlr-interest] grammar for jdk1.5 parameterized types
Ernest Pasour
sasecp at wnt.sas.com
Fri Sep 19 07:30:50 PDT 2003
I found the Sun suggested grammar in the public draft for jsr014. That was the "disgusting" grammar I referred to. It looks to me like that might be the appropriate solution though.
I'm also going to take a look at the clover grammar, but it may be too much black magic for me.
Thanks to everyone for their suggestions.
-----Original Message-----
From: John P N Pybus [mailto:john-yahoo at pybus.org]
Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 4:04 PM
To: antlr-interest at yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [antlr-interest] grammar for jdk1.5 parameterized types
I've had a quick look. Jamie's solution uses a bracket counter in the
lexer. This is a global counter for the file and I'm not quite sure how
it deals with odd comparison operations though:
if (n < 3) {
new List<Map<String>>();
}
The clover grammer Matthew referenced at:
http://www.thecortex.net/clover/generics.html#grammar
also uses a counter, but in the parser. It gets rather complicated though.
What I remember is the Sun document Matthew mentions, which I also can't
find. It uses the aformentioned GT_GT and GT_EQ approach which does
seem the simplest.
Yours,
John
Terence Parr wrote:
> For some reason my last post didn't appear.
>
> See the C++ templates added to Java solution by Jamie Herre on the
> antlr site. Not sure what he did any more. However, it's a simple
> matter in the lexer to track a tiny bit of context I think (i.e., did I
> see "class" or a class name)? It means the lexer needs access to the
> symbol table. I think Jamie did something clever, but can't remember.
> Perhaps my audio lectures have the answer ;)
>
> Ter
>
> On Thursday, September 18, 2003, at 11:55 AM, John P N Pybus wrote:
>
>
>>mzukowski at yci.com wrote:
>>
>>>You can't switch your lexer from the parser safely. ANTLR doesn't
>>>work that
>>>way (infinite lookahead and all that). I suggest getting rid of ">>"
>>>as a
>>>token and making the parser look for '>' '>' as GT.
>>>
>>>Monty
>>
>>Hmm, with the lexer ignoring Whitespace wouldn't the parser then allow
>>"n > > 3" as well as "n >> 3"?
>>
>>I'd suggest using lookahead in the lexer to define 3 tokens GT_GT,
>>GT_EQ, and GT corresponding to a '>' directly followed by another '>';
>>'>' followed by '=' and all other '>' chars, respectively.
>>
>>You can use ( GT | GT_GT ) in your parser rules for generics, and can
>>define the various shift operators as GT_GT GT; GT_GT GT_EQ EQ etc...
>>
>>I haven't done this with the antlr java grammar myself, but I believe
>>I've seen this approach used in other java1.5 recognisers (sorry no
>>reference handy).
>>
>>Hope this makes some sense.
>>
>>Yours,
>>
>>John
>>
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
More information about the antlr-interest
mailing list