| Modifying the default grammar [message #947013] |
Tue, 16 October 2012 14:29  |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Hi,
I use xbase and want to support using a tick (') behind a variable
reference to refer to the variable's previous value. The idea (at the
semantic level) is to have a hidden set of variables suffixed by
__PREVIOUS__ that remember the previous state and translate a reference
with the tick to refer to the hidden one. E.g. the identifier "a" refers
to "a" and "a'" refers to "a__PREVIOUS__".
The translation works, but I have problems redefining the grammar to
support this, without also redefining the ID terminal.
What I tried was the following:
// remove the use of tick in the String terminal
terminal STRING: '"' ( '\\' ('b'|'t'|'n'|'f'|'r'|'u'|'"'|"'"|'\\') |
!('\\'|'"') )* '"'
// support trailing tick, as 'previous' value
PreviousValueID: ValidID "'"?;
// use PreviousValueID in XMemberFeatureCall
XMemberFeatureCall returns xbase::XExpression: ...
The idea is to limit the use of the tick-suffixed references to variable
references. However, I still got syntax errors when I use the tick. I
also need to redefine the ID terminal to allow a trailing tick, but this
will allow it almost everywhere, including in class names. I couldn't
find other usages of tick in the grammar than in the STRING terminal, so
shouldn't it be enough to redefine only STRING and not ID?
Hallvard
|
|
|
| Re: Modifying the default grammar [message #947056 is a reply to message #947013] |
Tue, 16 October 2012 15:22  |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Hi Hallvard,
what kind of syntax error do you get?
Did you override XFeatureCall, too?
Overriding the ID rule should not be necessary.
Regards,
Sebastian
--
Looking for professional support for Xtext, Xtend or Eclipse Modeling?
Go visit: http://xtext.itemis.com
Am 16.10.12 20:29, schrieb Hallvard Trætteberg:
> Hi,
>
> I use xbase and want to support using a tick (') behind a variable
> reference to refer to the variable's previous value. The idea (at the
> semantic level) is to have a hidden set of variables suffixed by
> __PREVIOUS__ that remember the previous state and translate a reference
> with the tick to refer to the hidden one. E.g. the identifier "a" refers
> to "a" and "a'" refers to "a__PREVIOUS__".
>
> The translation works, but I have problems redefining the grammar to
> support this, without also redefining the ID terminal.
>
> What I tried was the following:
>
> // remove the use of tick in the String terminal
> terminal STRING: '"' ( '\\' ('b'|'t'|'n'|'f'|'r'|'u'|'"'|"'"|'\\') |
> !('\\'|'"') )* '"'
>
> // support trailing tick, as 'previous' value
> PreviousValueID: ValidID "'"?;
>
> // use PreviousValueID in XMemberFeatureCall
> XMemberFeatureCall returns xbase::XExpression: ...
>
> The idea is to limit the use of the tick-suffixed references to variable
> references. However, I still got syntax errors when I use the tick. I
> also need to redefine the ID terminal to allow a trailing tick, but this
> will allow it almost everywhere, including in class names. I couldn't
> find other usages of tick in the grammar than in the STRING terminal, so
> shouldn't it be enough to redefine only STRING and not ID?
>
> Hallvard
|
|
|
| Re: Modifying the default grammar [message #947084 is a reply to message #947056] |
Tue, 16 October 2012 16:00 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Sebastian,
You are right, I discovered a bit after posting. The problem was I
didn't override XFeatureCall (the rule used when there is no dot, which
is the case for ordinary variables).
I ended up redefining only the STRING terminal and the IdOrSuper rule,
which is used by XFeatureCall. XFeatureCall itself needn't be redefined.
Here's the overrides:
// remove apostrophe variant
terminal STRING: '"' ( '\\' ('b'|'t'|'n'|'f'|'r'|'u'|'"'|"'"|'\\') |
!('\\'|'"') )* '"';
// support trailing apostrophe, as 'previous' value
IdOrSuper: (ValidID "'"?) | "'" | "super";
I also needed to inject a new value converter for the IdOrSuper rule, so
the apostrophe suffix is converted to __PREVIOUS__.
I get a warning stating that "Decision can match input such as "'\''"
using multiple alternatives: 1, 2", but it seems to work...
Grammar overrides are very powerful, but you really need to understand
the grammar you're overriding.
Hallvard
On 16.10.12 12.22, Sebastian Zarnekow wrote:
> Hi Hallvard,
>
> what kind of syntax error do you get?
> Did you override XFeatureCall, too?
>
> Overriding the ID rule should not be necessary.
>
> Regards,
> Sebastian
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.03488 seconds
Home