mirror/stedolan-jq
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/stedolan/jq.git synced 2024-05-11 05:55:39 +00:00
Code Issues Releases Activity

Resolve remaining shift/reduce conflicts involving '?'

Browse Source 
By lowering the precedence of rules that should never use
the generic Exp '?' rule.
This commit is contained in:
David Tolnay
2015-07-18 23:44:06 -07:00
parent 66ef8e2c24
commit f5a7bba986
3 changed files with 959 additions and 917 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

1840
parser.c
View File

File diff suppressed because it is too large Load Diff

6
parser.h
View File

@ -106,7 +106,8 @@ struct lexer_param;
QQSTRING_INTERP_START = 297,
QQSTRING_INTERP_END = 298,
QQSTRING_END = 299,
FUNCDEF = 300
FUNCDEF = 300,
NONOPT = 301
};
#endif
/* Tokens. */
@ -153,6 +154,7 @@ struct lexer_param;
#define QQSTRING_INTERP_END 298
#define QQSTRING_END 299
#define FUNCDEF 300
#define NONOPT 301
/* Value type. */
#if ! defined YYSTYPE && ! defined YYSTYPE_IS_DECLARED
@ -164,7 +166,7 @@ union YYSTYPE
jv literal;
block blk;
#line 168 "parser.h" /* yacc.c:1909 */
#line 170 "parser.h" /* yacc.c:1909 */
};
# define YYSTYPE_IS_TRIVIAL 1
# define YYSTYPE_IS_DECLARED 1

30
parser.y
View File

@ -90,8 +90,9 @@ struct lexer_param;
%token QQSTRING_INTERP_END
%token QQSTRING_END
/* see Exp '?' rule */
%expect 9
/* Instead of raising this, find a way to use precedence to resolve
* shift-reduce conflicts. */
%expect 0
%precedence FUNCDEF
%right '|'
@ -103,6 +104,8 @@ struct lexer_param;
%nonassoc NEQ EQ '<' '>' LESSEQ GREATEREQ
%left '+' '-'
%left '*' '/' '%'
%precedence NONOPT /* non-optional; rules for which a specialized
'?' rule should be preferred over Exp '?' */
%precedence '?'
%precedence "try"
%precedence "catch"
@ -355,11 +358,6 @@ Term "as" Pattern '|' Exp {
jv_free(v);
} |
// This rule conflicts with all the other rules using the '?' operator.
// It doesn't matter which bison prefers: all of them result in the same
// syntax and semantics, but the more specific rules optimize better
// because they use opcodes specifically made for the purpose. We
// expect 9 such conflicts.
Exp '?' {
$$ = gen_try($1, gen_op_simple(BACKTRACK));
} |
@ -636,16 +634,16 @@ Term '.' String '?' {
'.' String '?' {
$$ = gen_index_opt(gen_noop(), $2);
} |
Term FIELD {
Term FIELD %prec NONOPT {
$$ = gen_index($1, gen_const($2));
} |
FIELD {
FIELD %prec NONOPT {
$$ = gen_index(gen_noop(), gen_const($1));
} |
Term '.' String {
Term '.' String %prec NONOPT {
$$ = gen_index($1, $3);
} |
'.' String {
'.' String %prec NONOPT {
$$ = gen_index(gen_noop(), $2);
} |
'.' error {
@ -661,13 +659,13 @@ Term '.' String {
Term '[' Exp ']' '?' {
$$ = gen_index_opt($1, $3);
} |
Term '[' Exp ']' {
Term '[' Exp ']' %prec NONOPT {
$$ = gen_index($1, $3);
} |
Term '[' ']' '?' {
$$ = block_join($1, gen_op_simple(EACH_OPT));
} |
Term '[' ']' {
Term '[' ']' %prec NONOPT {
$$ = block_join($1, gen_op_simple(EACH));
} |
Term '[' Exp ':' Exp ']' '?' {
@ -679,13 +677,13 @@ Term '[' Exp ':' ']' '?' {
Term '[' ':' Exp ']' '?' {
$$ = gen_slice_index($1, gen_const(jv_null()), $4, INDEX_OPT);
} |
Term '[' Exp ':' Exp ']' {
Term '[' Exp ':' Exp ']' %prec NONOPT {
$$ = gen_slice_index($1, $3, $5, INDEX);
} |
Term '[' Exp ':' ']' {
Term '[' Exp ':' ']' %prec NONOPT {
$$ = gen_slice_index($1, $3, gen_const(jv_null()), INDEX);
} |
Term '[' ':' Exp ']' {
Term '[' ':' Exp ']' %prec NONOPT {
$$ = gen_slice_index($1, gen_const(jv_null()), $4, INDEX);
} |
LITERAL {