taguniversalmachine

taguniversalmachine

Hi,

I am trying to define a parser for a simple grammar and I am getting hung up on something that I think is simple but I can’t figure out.

The grammar has two main structures, a definition and an invocation, of the form:

invocationname($a$b)(c<>d<>)
definitionname[(a<>b<>)($c$d)somestuff:someotherstuff]

I have the invocation one working, but for some reason even though the definition structure is very similar, I get an error that it is expecting the opening bracket, even though I am sending it.

The whole parser definition is here, and I will copy my interaction with it:

defmodule Atomix.Invocation.Parser do
  import NimbleParsec

  name = ascii_string([?A..?z], min: 1)

  definition_name = ascii_string([?A..?z], min: 1)

  invocation_name = ascii_string([?a..?z], min: 1)

  content_name = ascii_string([?A..?Z], min: 1)

  destination_place =
    string("$")
    |> concat(name)

  destination_list =
    destination_place
    |> repeat(destination_place)

  source_place =
    name
    |> string("<>")

  source_list =
    source_place
    |> repeat(source_place)

  place_of_resolution =
    string("+")

  contained_definitions =
    string("=")


  defparsec(
    :invocation,
    invocation_name
    |> string("(")
    |> concat(destination_list)
    |> string(")")
    |> string("(")
    |> concat(source_list)
    |> string(")")
  )

  defparsec(
    :definition,
    definition_name
    |> string("[")
    |> concat(source_list)
    |> concat(destination_list)
    |> concat(place_of_resolution)
    |> string(":")
    |> concat(contained_definitions)
    |> string("]")
  )
end

iex(2)> Parser.invocation(“dfsd($a$b)(a<>b<>)”)
{:ok, [“dfsd”, “(”, “$”, “a”, “$”, “b”, “)”, “(”, “a”, “<>”, “b”, “<>”, “)”],
“”, %{}, {1, 0}, 18}
iex(3)> Parser.definition(“fdafa[(a<>b<>)fdsaf:fadf]”)
{:error, “expected string "["”, “(a<>b<>)fdsaf:fadf]”, %{}, {1, 0}, 6}

Why am I getting the error about expecting the bracket when it is clearly there?
Thanks for any pointers.

Showing Posts 1 to 6

kip

kip

ex_cldr Core Team

The problem is that you are defining character ranges that encompass the [ character:

  name = ascii_string([?A..?z], min: 1)
  definition_name = ascii_string([?A..?z], min: 1)

In the ASCII character set, ?a..?z and ?A..?Z are not contiguous with each other. For example:

iex> ?A..?z
65..122
iex> ?[
91

So you can see that [ fits in the range ?A..?z and therefore your [ is being consumed by definition_name. You can add a call to debug() in your combinator pipeline which will output some information that can often help with tracking down these issues.

I think you probably meant:

  name = ascii_string([?A..?Z,?a..?z], min: 1)
  definition_name = ascii_string([?A..?Z,?a..?z], min: 1)
kip

kip

ex_cldr Core Team

I think your definition parser still needs some development but I took a stab at a version of invocation that is a bit more idiomatic:

defmodule Atomix.Invocation.Parser do
  import NimbleParsec

  name = 
    |> ascii_string([?A..?Z, ?a..?z], min: 1)
    |> unwrap_and_tag(:name)

  definition_name =
    ascii_string([?a..?z, ?A..?Z], min: 1)
    |> unwrap_and_tag(:destination_name)

  invocation_name =
    ascii_string([?a..?z], min: 1)
    |> unwrap_and_tag(:invocation_name)

  content_name =
    ascii_string([?A..?Z], min: 1)
    |> unwrap_and_tag(:content_name)

  destination_place =
    ignore(string("$"))
    |> concat(name)
    |> unwrap_and_tag(:destination_place)

  destination_list =
    destination_place
    |> repeat(destination_place)
    |> tag(:destination_list)

  source_place =
    name
    |> ignore(string("<>"))
    |> unwrap_and_tag(:source_place)

  source_list =
    source_place
    |> repeat(source_place)
    |> tag(:source_list)

  place_of_resolution =
    string("+")

  contained_definitions =
    string("=")


  defparsec(
    :invocation,
    invocation_name
    |> ignore(string("("))
    |> concat(destination_list)
    |> ignore(string(")"))
    |> ignore(string("("))
    |> concat(source_list)
    |> ignore(string(")"))
  )

  defparsec(
    :definition,
    definition_name
    |> ignore(string("["))
    |> concat(source_list)
    |> concat(destination_list)
    |> concat(place_of_resolution)
    |> string(":")
    |> concat(contained_definitions)
    |> string("]")
  )
end

In use:

iex> Parser.invocation("dfsd($a$b)(a<>b<>)")
{:ok,
 [
   invocation_name: "dfsd",
   destination_list: [destination_place: "a", destination_place: "b"],
   source_list: [source_place: "a", source_place: "b"]
 ], "", %{}, {1, 0}, 18}
taguniversalmachine

taguniversalmachine OP

Ooh thank you very much, I don’t know how many years I’ve been looking at ASCII charts and I didn’t even think to check, Thank you very much for the tip about debug() and also for how to properly use tags!

taguniversalmachine

taguniversalmachine OP

Actually I do have one follow up question, if you don’t mind - what is the purpose of using ignore(string()) as opposed to just string()? I find it works both ways and the doc doesn’t really explain what ignore does. I mean I understand conceptually that string() would require the string to be present while ignore will just tolerate it but that doesn’t seem to be the way it works, ignore actually requires the string.

fuelen

fuelen

ignore simply instructs not to put data from combinator to the output.
Let’s say we have the following parser:

defmodule MyRange do
  import NimbleParsec
  range = integer(min: 1) |> ignore(string("..")) |> integer(min: 1)
  defparsec(:parse, range)
end
> MyRange.parse("200..300")
{:ok, [200, 300], "", %{}, {1, 0}, 8}

But when you remove ignore combinator, the output is this:

MyRange.parse("200..300")
{:ok, [200, "..", 300], "", %{}, {1, 0}, 8}
taguniversalmachine

taguniversalmachine OP

oh gotcha, thank you very much for the explanation!

— All posts loaded —

Where Next? Top

Trending in Questions Top

RSP87
I’m working on a project that simulates the bumbl example in the programming phoenix book. It acts almost like an email client. We have a...
New
nseaSeb
Hello, I know there is an approach for handling lists that allows for optimized traversal, but I can’t recall the specific method (somet...
New
brecabral
Documentation While reading the Scoped Routes section, I noticed that the documentation currently refers to a problem without explainin...
New
RemyXRenard
I’m seeing that a list inside a Kino.DataTable will be interpreted as a charlist, even if the Kino.configure() is set to charlists: :as_l...
New
velrest
So my question is quite simple and i have found no conclusive answer on forum, google or AI. Should we use :erlang.float for Integer to ...
New
samoloth
Hi, I’ve just set up an application with ash_authentication. There is only magic link strategy for now, so there is no confirmation add o...
New
FlyingNoodle
If a change or preparation module uses Ash.Changeset.get_argument/2 or Ash.Query.get_argument/2 (or any of the other get_argument functio...
New

Other Trending Topics Top

JesseHerrick
Hey, I’m Jesse and I’m the main contributor behind Dexter, a full-featured, lightning-fast Elixir LSP optimized for large codebases. It s...
New
mudasobwa
I am happy to introduce the very α version of the new programming language compiled to BEAM. Welcome Cure. It has literally three kille...
New
marciok
Hi there! We created Gust: A task orchestrator inspired by Airflow. For those who have never heard about Aiflow, it’s a Python-based wor...
New
mhanberg
Hi everyone! The first release candidate for the Expert language server project is now available! We’ve published a press release detai...
New
jimsynz
Beam Bots (or just BB for short) is a framework for building fault-tolerant robotics applications in Elixir using familiar OTP patterns. ...
New
Dmk
Xamal is a deployment tool for Elixir apps that deploys native releases to bare metal servers over SSH. It’s a port of GitHub - basecamp/...
New

We're in Beta

About us Mission Statement

Options

Thread Display Mode




Thread Preview

Skip Thread Previews