Eclipse Community Forums: TMF (Xtext) » simplified grammar for autocompletion

Home » Modeling » TMF (Xtext) » simplified grammar for autocompletion

simplified grammar for autocompletion [message #878704]

Tue, 29 May 2012 15:17

Eclipse User

Hi!

I am fighting with my language and it's harder than I think it should be. I just realized that because the source will be fed to a full compiler anyway, the Xtext grammar doesn't have to get everything right, maybe. While writing this message, I have second thoughts Smile

I thought I could ignore operator precedence and similar things that make the grammar more complex while not giving any useful information for the IDE services. There is already a simplified grammar generated for the completion service.

But then the serialization/formatting came to mind, and then even the quickfixes: I think these would need a full grammar anyway, in order to get all the details right...

Does anyone have any comments on this idea?

best regards,
Vlad

Re: simplified grammar for autocompletion [message #878720 is a reply to message #878704]

Tue, 29 May 2012 15:47

Eclipse User

Hi Vlad,

the content assist grammar is not simplified at all. It's a lot more
complicated than the production grammar that Xtext uses just in order to
'convince' antlr to produce the right output / events that are intercepted.

I can only recommend to use a grammar that mirrors the precedencies of
your language. Otherwise you'll end up with a big mess when it comes to
the outline view, code folding, error recovery in the parser, content
assist, scoping ... well you get the idea.

Regards,
Sebastian
--
Need professional support for Eclipse Modeling?
Go visit: http://xtext.itemis.com

Am 29.05.12 21:17, schrieb Vlad Dumitrescu:
> Hi!
>
> I am fighting with my language and it's harder than I think it should
> be. I just realized that because the source will be fed to a full
> compiler anyway, the Xtext grammar doesn't have to get everything right,
> maybe. While writing this message, I have second thoughts :)
>
> I thought I could ignore operator precedence and similar things that
> make the grammar more complex while not giving any useful information
> for the IDE services. There is already a simplified grammar generated
> for the completion service.
> But then the serialization/formatting came to mind, and then even the
> quickfixes: I think these would need a full grammar anyway, in order to
> get all the details right...
>
> Does anyone have any comments on this idea?
> best regards,
> Vlad
>

Re: simplified grammar for autocompletion [message #878749 is a reply to message #878720]

Tue, 29 May 2012 17:28

Eclipse User

Thanks for the clarification, Sebastian, I had it all wrong!

I'll fight my way with the LinkingService, then... Please expect exasperated questions in the near future Very Happy

BTW there's an inconsistency in the documentation: ILinkingService#getLinkedObjects says
"Returns all {@link EObject}s referenced by the given link text in the given context."
while DefaultLinkingService#getLinkedObjects says
"@return the first element returned from the injected {@link IScopeProvider} which matches the text of the passed {@link INode node}"

Which one is right? What is the meaning of returning multiple objects?

Thanks,
Vlad

Re: simplified grammar for autocompletion [message #878767 is a reply to message #878749]

Tue, 29 May 2012 18:24

Eclipse User

On 2012-29-05 23:28, Vlad Dumitrescu wrote:
> Thanks for the clarification, Sebastian, I had it all wrong!
>
> I'll fight my way with the LinkingService, then... Please expect
> exasperated questions in the near future :d
>
> BTW there's an inconsistency in the documentation:
> ILinkingService#getLinkedObjects says "Returns all {@link EObject}s
> referenced by the given link text in the given context." while
> DefaultLinkingService#getLinkedObjects says
> "@return the first element returned from the injected {@link
> IScopeProvider} which matches the text of the passed {@link INode node}"
>
> Which one is right? What is the meaning of returning multiple objects?
> Thanks,
> Vlad
>
I can imagine that you would want to be able to pick "the best" in case
there are several matching objects. By name alone the result could be
ambiguous, and the default implementation simply picks the first, but
some other implementation may do something more advanced.

(I am not an expert though).

- henrik

Re: simplified grammar for autocompletion [message #878914 is a reply to message #878767]

Wed, 30 May 2012 03:34

Eclipse User

Hi Henrik,

Where would I do that picking? Since I have my own LinkingService, I can select the right object there and return it. I didn't look further, to which services use this result and what they do with it.

It could also be a form of poor-man's Option monad, so that results from multiple linking services may be put together without caring for null (which would otherwise be returned when no match is found).

regards,
Vlad

Previous Topic:	Out of memory during full build
Next Topic:	Xtext & EAnnotation

Goto Forum:

-=] Back to Top [=-

Current Time: Sat Jul 26 07:26:42 EDT 2025

.:: Contact :: Home ::.

Breadcrumbs

Sign up to our Newsletter