Many resources are needed to download a project. Please understand that we have to compensate our server costs. Thank you in advance. Project price only 1 $
You can buy this project and download/modify it how often you want.
/*
* Copyright (c) 2012-2017 The ANTLR Project. All rights reserved.
* Use of this file is governed by the BSD 3-clause license that
* can be found in the LICENSE.txt file in the project root.
*/
package org.antlr.v4.kotlinruntime.atn
import com.strumenta.kotlinmultiplatform.BitSet
import org.antlr.v4.kotlinruntime.misc.AbstractEqualityComparator
import org.antlr.v4.kotlinruntime.misc.FlexibleHashMap
import org.antlr.v4.kotlinruntime.misc.MurmurHash
/**
* This enumeration defines the prediction modes available in ANTLR 4 along with
* utility methods for analyzing configuration sets for conflicts and/or
* ambiguities.
*/
enum class PredictionMode {
/**
* The SLL(*) prediction mode. This prediction mode ignores the current
* parser context when making predictions. This is the fastest prediction
* mode, and provides correct results for many grammars. This prediction
* mode is more powerful than the prediction mode provided by ANTLR 3, but
* may result in syntax errors for grammar and input combinations which are
* not SLL.
*
*
*
* When using this prediction mode, the parser will either return a correct
* parse tree (i.e. the same parse tree that would be returned with the
* [.LL] prediction mode), or it will report a syntax error. If a
* syntax error is encountered when using the [.SLL] prediction mode,
* it may be due to either an actual syntax error in the input or indicate
* that the particular combination of grammar and input requires the more
* powerful [.LL] prediction abilities to complete successfully.
*
*
*
* This prediction mode does not provide any guarantees for prediction
* behavior for syntactically-incorrect inputs.
*/
SLL,
/**
* The LL(*) prediction mode. This prediction mode allows the current parser
* context to be used for resolving SLL conflicts that occur during
* prediction. This is the fastest prediction mode that guarantees correct
* parse results for all combinations of grammars with syntactically correct
* inputs.
*
*
*
* When using this prediction mode, the parser will make correct decisions
* for all syntactically-correct grammar and input combinations. However, in
* cases where the grammar is truly ambiguous this prediction mode might not
* report a precise answer for *exactly which* alternatives are
* ambiguous.
*
*
*
* This prediction mode does not provide any guarantees for prediction
* behavior for syntactically-incorrect inputs.
*/
LL,
/**
* The LL(*) prediction mode with exact ambiguity detection. In addition to
* the correctness guarantees provided by the [.LL] prediction mode,
* this prediction mode instructs the prediction algorithm to determine the
* complete and exact set of ambiguous alternatives for every ambiguous
* decision encountered while parsing.
*
*
*
* This prediction mode may be used for diagnosing ambiguities during
* grammar development. Due to the performance overhead of calculating sets
* of ambiguous alternatives, this prediction mode should be avoided when
* the exact results are not necessary.
*
*
*
* This prediction mode does not provide any guarantees for prediction
* behavior for syntactically-incorrect inputs.
*/
LL_EXACT_AMBIG_DETECTION;
/** A Map that uses just the state and the stack context as the key. */
internal class AltAndContextMap : FlexibleHashMap(AltAndContextConfigEqualityComparator.INSTANCE) {
// TODO decorate?
}
private class AltAndContextConfigEqualityComparator private constructor() : AbstractEqualityComparator() {
/**
* The hash code is only a function of the [ATNState.stateNumber]
* and [ATNConfig.context].
*/
override fun hashCode(o: ATNConfig): Int {
var hashCode = MurmurHash.initialize(7)
hashCode = MurmurHash.update(hashCode, o.state.stateNumber)
hashCode = MurmurHash.update(hashCode, o.context)
hashCode = MurmurHash.finish(hashCode, 2)
return hashCode
}
override fun equals(a: ATNConfig?, b: ATNConfig?): Boolean {
if (a === b) return true
return if (a == null || b == null) false else a!!.state.stateNumber == b!!.state.stateNumber && a!!.context == b!!.context
}
companion object {
val INSTANCE = AltAndContextConfigEqualityComparator()
}
}
companion object {
/**
* Computes the SLL prediction termination condition.
*
*
*
* This method computes the SLL prediction termination condition for both of
* the following cases.
*
*
* * The usual SLL+LL fallback upon SLL conflict
* * Pure SLL without LL fallback
*
*
*
* **COMBINED SLL+LL PARSING**
*
*
* When LL-fallback is enabled upon SLL conflict, correct predictions are
* ensured regardless of how the termination condition is computed by this
* method. Due to the substantially higher cost of LL prediction, the
* prediction should only fall back to LL when the additional lookahead
* cannot lead to a unique SLL prediction.
*
*
* Assuming combined SLL+LL parsing, an SLL configuration set with only
* conflicting subsets should fall back to full LL, even if the
* configuration sets don't resolve to the same alternative (e.g.
* `{1,2}` and `{3,4}`. If there is at least one non-conflicting
* configuration, SLL could continue with the hopes that more lookahead will
* resolve via one of those non-conflicting configurations.
*
*
* Here's the prediction termination rule them: SLL (for SLL+LL parsing)
* stops when it sees only conflicting configuration subsets. In contrast,
* full LL keeps going when there is uncertainty.
*
*
* **HEURISTIC**
*
*
* As a heuristic, we stop prediction when we see any conflicting subset
* unless we see a state that only has one alternative associated with it.
* The single-alt-state thing lets prediction continue upon rules like
* (otherwise, it would admit defeat too soon):
*
*
* `[12|1|[], 6|2|[], 12|2|[]]. s : (ID | ID ID?) ';' ;`
*
*
* When the ATN simulation reaches the state before `';'`, it has a
* DFA state that looks like: `[12|1|[], 6|2|[], 12|2|[]]`. Naturally
* `12|1|[]` and `12|2|[]` conflict, but we cannot stop
* processing this node because alternative to has another way to continue,
* via `[6|2|[]]`.
*
*
* It also let's us continue for this rule:
*
*
* `[1|1|[], 1|2|[], 8|3|[]] a : A | A | A B ;`
*
*
* After matching input A, we reach the stop state for rule A, state 1.
* State 8 is the state right before B. Clearly alternatives 1 and 2
* conflict and no amount of further lookahead will separate the two.
* However, alternative 3 will be able to continue and so we do not stop
* working on this state. In the previous example, we're concerned with
* states associated with the conflicting alternatives. Here alt 3 is not
* associated with the conflicting configs, but since we can continue
* looking for input reasonably, don't declare the state done.
*
*
* **PURE SLL PARSING**
*
*
* To handle pure SLL parsing, all we have to do is make sure that we
* combine stack contexts for configurations that differ only by semantic
* predicate. From there, we can do the usual SLL termination heuristic.
*
*
* **PREDICATES IN SLL+LL PARSING**
*
*
* SLL decisions don't evaluate predicates until after they reach DFA stop
* states because they need to create the DFA cache that works in all
* semantic situations. In contrast, full LL evaluates predicates collected
* during start state computation so it can ignore predicates thereafter.
* This means that SLL termination detection can totally ignore semantic
* predicates.
*
*
* Implementation-wise, [ATNConfigSet] combines stack contexts but not
* semantic predicate contexts so we might see two configurations like the
* following.
*
*
* `(s, 1, x, {}), (s, 1, x', {p})`
*
*
* Before testing these configurations against others, we have to merge
* `x` and `x'` (without modifying the existing configurations).
* For example, we test `(x+x')==x''` when looking for conflicts in
* the following configurations.
*
*
* `(s, 1, x, {}), (s, 1, x', {p}), (s, 2, x'', {})`
*
*
* If the configuration set has predicates (as indicated by
* [ATNConfigSet.hasSemanticContext]), this algorithm makes a copy of
* the configurations to strip out all of the predicates so that a standard
* [ATNConfigSet] will merge everything ignoring predicates.
*/
fun hasSLLConflictTerminatingPrediction(mode: PredictionMode, configs: ATNConfigSet): Boolean {
var configs = configs
/* Configs in rule stop states indicate reaching the end of the decision
* rule (local context) or end of start rule (full context). If all
* configs meet this condition, then none of the configurations is able
* to match additional input so we terminate prediction.
*/
if (allConfigsInRuleStopStates(configs)) {
return true
}
// pure SLL mode parsing
if (mode == PredictionMode.SLL) {
// Don't bother with combining configs from different semantic
// contexts if we can fail over to full LL; costs more time
// since we'll often fail over anyway.
if (configs.hasSemanticContext) {
// dup configs, tossing out semantic predicates
val dup = ATNConfigSet()
for (c in configs) {
var mutableC = c
mutableC = ATNConfig(mutableC, SemanticContext.NONE)
dup.add(mutableC)
}
configs = dup
}
// now we have combined contexts for configs with dissimilar preds
}
// pure SLL or combined SLL+LL mode parsing
val altsets = getConflictingAltSubsets(configs)
return hasConflictingAltSet(altsets) && !hasStateAssociatedWithOneAlt(configs)
}
/**
* Checks if any configuration in `configs` is in a
* [RuleStopState]. Configurations meeting this condition have reached
* the end of the decision rule (local context) or end of start rule (full
* context).
*
* @param configs the configuration set to test
* @return `true` if any configuration in `configs` is in a
* [RuleStopState], otherwise `false`
*/
fun hasConfigInRuleStopState(configs: ATNConfigSet): Boolean {
for (c in configs) {
if (c.state is RuleStopState) {
return true
}
}
return false
}
/**
* Checks if all configurations in `configs` are in a
* [RuleStopState]. Configurations meeting this condition have reached
* the end of the decision rule (local context) or end of start rule (full
* context).
*
* @param configs the configuration set to test
* @return `true` if all configurations in `configs` are in a
* [RuleStopState], otherwise `false`
*/
fun allConfigsInRuleStopStates(configs: ATNConfigSet): Boolean {
for (config in configs) {
if (config.state !is RuleStopState) {
return false
}
}
return true
}
/**
* Full LL prediction termination.
*
*
* Can we stop looking ahead during ATN simulation or is there some
* uncertainty as to which alternative we will ultimately pick, after
* consuming more input? Even if there are partial conflicts, we might know
* that everything is going to resolve to the same minimum alternative. That
* means we can stop since no more lookahead will change that fact. On the
* other hand, there might be multiple conflicts that resolve to different
* minimums. That means we need more look ahead to decide which of those
* alternatives we should predict.
*
*
* The basic idea is to split the set of configurations `C`, into
* conflicting subsets `(s, _, ctx, _)` and singleton subsets with
* non-conflicting configurations. Two configurations conflict if they have
* identical [ATNConfig.state] and [ATNConfig.context] values
* but different [ATNConfig.alt] value, e.g. `(s, i, ctx, _)`
* and `(s, j, ctx, _)` for `i!=j`.
*
*
* Reduce these configuration subsets to the set of possible alternatives.
* You can compute the alternative subsets in one pass as follows:
*
*
* `A_s,ctx = {i | (s, i, ctx, _)}` for each configuration in
* `C` holding `s` and `ctx` fixed.
*
*
* Or in pseudo-code, for each configuration `c` in `C`:
*
*
* map[c] U= c.[alt][ATNConfig.alt] # map hash/equals uses s and x, not
* alt and not pred
*
*
*
* The values in `map` are the set of `A_s,ctx` sets.
*
*
* If `|A_s,ctx|=1` then there is no conflict associated with
* `s` and `ctx`.
*
*
* Reduce the subsets to singletons by choosing a minimum of each subset. If
* the union of these alternative subsets is a singleton, then no amount of
* more lookahead will help us. We will always pick that alternative. If,
* however, there is more than one alternative, then we are uncertain which
* alternative to predict and must continue looking for resolution. We may
* or may not discover an ambiguity in the future, even if there are no
* conflicting subsets this round.
*
*
* The biggest sin is to terminate early because it means we've made a
* decision but were uncertain as to the eventual outcome. We haven't used
* enough lookahead. On the other hand, announcing a conflict too late is no
* big deal; you will still have the conflict. It's just inefficient. It
* might even look until the end of file.
*
*
* No special consideration for semantic predicates is required because
* predicates are evaluated on-the-fly for full LL prediction, ensuring that
* no configuration contains a semantic context during the termination
* check.
*
*
* **CONFLICTING CONFIGS**
*
*
* Two configurations `(s, i, x)` and `(s, j, x')`, conflict
* when `i!=j` but `x=x'`. Because we merge all
* `(s, i, _)` configurations together, that means that there are at
* most `n` configurations associated with state `s` for
* `n` possible alternatives in the decision. The merged stacks
* complicate the comparison of configuration contexts `x` and
* `x'`. Sam checks to see if one is a subset of the other by calling
* merge and checking to see if the merged result is either `x` or
* `x'`. If the `x` associated with lowest alternative `i`
* is the superset, then `i` is the only possible prediction since the
* others resolve to `min(i)` as well. However, if `x` is
* associated with `j>i` then at least one stack configuration for
* `j` is not in conflict with alternative `i`. The algorithm
* should keep going, looking for more lookahead due to the uncertainty.
*
*
* For simplicity, I'm doing a equality check between `x` and
* `x'` that lets the algorithm continue to consume lookahead longer
* than necessary. The reason I like the equality is of course the
* simplicity but also because that is the test you need to detect the
* alternatives that are actually in conflict.
*
*
* **CONTINUE/STOP RULE**
*
*
* Continue if union of resolved alternative sets from non-conflicting and
* conflicting alternative subsets has more than one alternative. We are
* uncertain about which alternative to predict.
*
*
* The complete set of alternatives, `[i for (_,i,_)]`, tells us which
* alternatives are still in the running for the amount of input we've
* consumed at this point. The conflicting sets let us to strip away
* configurations that won't lead to more states because we resolve
* conflicts to the configuration with a minimum alternate for the
* conflicting set.
*
*
* **CASES**
*
*
*
* * no conflicts and more than 1 alternative in set => continue
*
* * `(s, 1, x)`, `(s, 2, x)`, `(s, 3, z)`,
* `(s', 1, y)`, `(s', 2, y)` yields non-conflicting set
* `{3}` U conflicting sets `min({1,2})` U `min({1,2})` =
* `{1,3}` => continue
*
*
* * `(s, 1, x)`, `(s, 2, x)`, `(s', 1, y)`,
* `(s', 2, y)`, `(s'', 1, z)` yields non-conflicting set
* `{1}` U conflicting sets `min({1,2})` U `min({1,2})` =
* `{1}` => stop and predict 1
*
* * `(s, 1, x)`, `(s, 2, x)`, `(s', 1, y)`,
* `(s', 2, y)` yields conflicting, reduced sets `{1}` U
* `{1}` = `{1}` => stop and predict 1, can announce
* ambiguity `{1,2}`
*
* * `(s, 1, x)`, `(s, 2, x)`, `(s', 2, y)`,
* `(s', 3, y)` yields conflicting, reduced sets `{1}` U
* `{2}` = `{1,2}` => continue
*
* * `(s, 1, x)`, `(s, 2, x)`, `(s', 3, y)`,
* `(s', 4, y)` yields conflicting, reduced sets `{1}` U
* `{3}` = `{1,3}` => continue
*
*
*
*
* **EXACT AMBIGUITY DETECTION**
*
*
* If all states report the same conflicting set of alternatives, then we
* know we have the exact ambiguity set.
*
*
* `|A_*i*|>1` and
* `A_*i* = A_*j*` for all *i*, *j*.
*
*
* In other words, we continue examining lookahead until all `A_i`
* have more than one alternative and all `A_i` are the same. If
* `A={{1,2}, {1,3}}`, then regular LL prediction would terminate
* because the resolved set is `{1}`. To determine what the real
* ambiguity is, we have to know whether the ambiguity is between one and
* two or one and three so we keep going. We can only stop prediction when
* we need exact ambiguity detection when the sets look like
* `A={{1,2}}` or `{{1,2},{1,2}}`, etc...
*/
fun resolvesToJustOneViableAlt(altsets: Collection): Int {
return getSingleViableAlt(altsets)
}
/**
* Determines if every alternative subset in `altsets` contains more
* than one alternative.
*
* @param altsets a collection of alternative subsets
* @return `true` if every [BitSet] in `altsets` has
* [cardinality][BitSet.cardinality] > 1, otherwise `false`
*/
fun allSubsetsConflict(altsets: Collection): Boolean {
return !hasNonConflictingAltSet(altsets)
}
/**
* Determines if any single alternative subset in `altsets` contains
* exactly one alternative.
*
* @param altsets a collection of alternative subsets
* @return `true` if `altsets` contains a [BitSet] with
* [cardinality][BitSet.cardinality] 1, otherwise `false`
*/
fun hasNonConflictingAltSet(altsets: Collection): Boolean {
for (alts in altsets) {
if (alts.cardinality() == 1) {
return true
}
}
return false
}
/**
* Determines if any single alternative subset in `altsets` contains
* more than one alternative.
*
* @param altsets a collection of alternative subsets
* @return `true` if `altsets` contains a [BitSet] with
* [cardinality][BitSet.cardinality] > 1, otherwise `false`
*/
fun hasConflictingAltSet(altsets: Collection): Boolean {
for (alts in altsets) {
if (alts.cardinality() > 1) {
return true
}
}
return false
}
/**
* Determines if every alternative subset in `altsets` is equivalent.
*
* @param altsets a collection of alternative subsets
* @return `true` if every member of `altsets` is equal to the
* others, otherwise `false`
*/
fun allSubsetsEqual(altsets: Collection): Boolean {
val it = altsets.iterator()
val first = it.next()
while (it.hasNext()) {
val next = it.next()
if (next != first) return false
}
return true
}
/**
* Returns the unique alternative predicted by all alternative subsets in
* `altsets`. If no such alternative exists, this method returns
* [ATN.INVALID_ALT_NUMBER].
*
* @param altsets a collection of alternative subsets
*/
fun getUniqueAlt(altsets: Collection): Int {
val all = getAlts(altsets)
return if (all.cardinality() == 1) all.nextSetBit(0) else ATN.INVALID_ALT_NUMBER
}
/**
* Gets the complete set of represented alternatives for a collection of
* alternative subsets. This method returns the union of each [BitSet]
* in `altsets`.
*
* @param altsets a collection of alternative subsets
* @return the set of represented alternatives in `altsets`
*/
fun getAlts(altsets: Collection): BitSet {
val all = BitSet()
for (alts in altsets) {
all.or(alts)
}
return all
}
/**
* Get union of all alts from configs.
*
* @since 4.5.1
*/
fun getAlts(configs: ATNConfigSet): BitSet {
val alts = BitSet()
for (config in configs) {
alts.set(config.alt)
}
return alts
}
/**
* This function gets the conflicting alt subsets from a configuration set.
* For each configuration `c` in `configs`:
*
*
* map[c] U= c.[alt][ATNConfig.alt] # map hash/equals uses s and x, not
* alt and not pred
*
*/
fun getConflictingAltSubsets(configs: ATNConfigSet): Collection {
val configToAlts = AltAndContextMap()
for (c in configs) {
var alts = configToAlts.get(c)
if (alts == null) {
alts = BitSet()
configToAlts.put(c, alts)
}
alts!!.set(c.alt)
}
return configToAlts.values
}
/**
* Get a map from state to alt subset from a configuration set. For each
* configuration `c` in `configs`:
*
*
*
*/
fun getStateToAltMap(configs: ATNConfigSet): Map {
val m = HashMap()
for (c in configs) {
var alts: BitSet? = m[c.state]
if (alts == null) {
alts = BitSet()
m.put(c.state, alts)
}
alts.set(c.alt)
}
return m
}
fun hasStateAssociatedWithOneAlt(configs: ATNConfigSet): Boolean {
val x = getStateToAltMap(configs)
for (alts in x.values) {
if (alts.cardinality() == 1) return true
}
return false
}
fun getSingleViableAlt(altsets: Collection): Int {
val viableAlts = BitSet()
for (alts in altsets) {
val minAlt = alts.nextSetBit(0)
viableAlts.set(minAlt)
if (viableAlts.cardinality() > 1) { // more than 1 viable alt
return ATN.INVALID_ALT_NUMBER
}
}
return viableAlts.nextSetBit(0)
}
}
}
