From: Siraaj Khandkar Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2018 21:45:06 +0000 (-0400) Subject: Add some of implementation notes to README X-Git-Url: https://git.xandkar.net/?p=tiger.ml.git;a=commitdiff_plain;h=299dd05453cc3ce02261fe3f224d9f19a28ec551 Add some of implementation notes to README --- diff --git a/README.md b/README.md index cae72e2..0678fa9 100644 --- a/README.md +++ b/README.md @@ -60,11 +60,88 @@ Implementation Notes #### shift/reduce conflicts ##### grouping consecutive declarations +In order to support mutual recursion, we need to group consecutive +type and function declarations (see Tiger-book pages 97-99). + +Initially, I defined the rules to do so as: + + decs: + | dec { $1 :: [] } + | dec decs { $1 :: $2 } + ; + dec: + | var_dec { $1 } + | typ_decs { Ast.TypeDecs $1 } + | fun_decs { Ast.FunDecs $1 } + ; + +which, while straightforward (and working, because `ocamlyacc` defaults to +shift in case of a conflict), nonetheless caused a shift/reduce conflict in +each of: `typ_decs` and `fun_decs`; where the parser did not know whether to +shift and stay in `(typ|fun_)_dec` state or to reduce and get back to `dec` +state. + +Sadly, tagging the rules with a lower precedence (to explicitly favor +shifting) - does not help :( + + %nonassoc LOWEST + ... + dec: + | var_dec { $1 } + | typ_decs %prec LOWEST { Ast.TypeDecs $1 } + | fun_decs %prec LOWEST { Ast.FunDecs $1 } + ; + +The difficulty seems to be in the lack of a separator token which would be +able to definitively mark the end of each sequence of consecutive +`(typ_|fun_)` declarations. + +Keeping this in mind, another alternative is to manually capture the possible +interspersion patterns in the rules like: + + (N * foo) followed-by (N * not-foo) + +for the exception of `var_dec`, which, since we do not need to group its +consecutive sequences, can be reduced upon first sighting. + ##### lval ### AST #### print as M-exp +I chose to pretty-print AST as an (indented) +[M-expression](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M-expression) - an underrated +format, used in Mathematica and was intended for Lisp by McCarthy himself; it +is nearly as flexible as S-expressions, but significantly more readable (IMO). + +As an example, here is what `test28.tig` looks like after parsing and +pretty-printing: + + LetExp[ + [ + TypeDecs[ + TypeDec[ + arrtype1, + ArrayTy[ + int]], + TypeDec[ + arrtype2, + ArrayTy[ + int]]], + VarDec[ + arr1, + arrtype1, + ArrayExp[ + arrtype2, + IntExp[ + 10], + IntExp[ + 0]]]], + SeqExp[ + VarExp[ + SimpleVar[ + arr1]]]] + ### Machine Will most-likely compile to RISC and execute using SPIM (as favored by Appel)