Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Keep It Simple, Stupid

Re: Re: Parse::RecDescent

by ixo111 (Acolyte)
on Oct 30, 2002 at 10:38 UTC ( #209022=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

in reply to Re: Parse::RecDescent
in thread Parse::RecDescent

I believe in this case that is proper, as tags may be next to one another, separated by zero or more of anything that isn't a < .. or am i missing some subtlety there? thanks for the reply!

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Re: Parse::RecDescent
by gjb (Vicar) on Oct 30, 2002 at 19:32 UTC

    The grammar already specifies that tags can be next to one another.

    I'm not entirely sure that Parse::RecDescent works the way I describe below, but most parser generators such as YACC and AntLR do.

    First of all, the input is split in a stream of tokens. Tokens are specified by regular expressions and are supposed to be separated by some separator (mostly whitespace). Let's assume the input to be parsed looks like:

    <tag1>text 1</tag1><tag2>text 2</tag2>
    Now we would like to get the following tokens (quoted and separated by commas for legibility):
    '<tag1>', 'text 1', '</tag1>', '<tag2>', 'text 2', '</tag2>'
    So as you already indicated, there are two types of tokens, tags and text, and they can be defined as you did.
    TAG: /<(?:\/?)\w+>/ TEXT: /[^<>]+/
    Note the + though. Each of these token definitions will capture what we want them to capture, tags and text respectively. So by applying these definitions, we can split the input in the desired stream of tokens. This is phase one, the lexical analysis. If you're using YACC, you'll do this by using LEX.

    Now for phase two: now we specify how the tokens can appear in the input stream so that we consider the input "valid", ie. conform to the grammar. This is quite simple in this case:

    INPUT: ( TAG | TEXT )*
    Now we're no longer trying to match characters, but rather tokens, so the input to this phase looks like:
    This is a very simple grammar, so it isn't obvious here, but the result is in fact a (parse) tree that looks like:
        /   /   |   |   \   \
    (sorry for the rather lousy graphics ;-) If we just want to verify that the input satisfies the grammar, we're done. In general though, we want to do something with the parsed input, so we have to attach actions to the grammar nodes. Something like "add the content of the TEXT to some list" or whatever. This is the semantics of the grammar.

    Now for "empty" tokens, it should now seem strange to have an empty token, each token is some meaningful entity in the input.

    I hope this clarifies matters a bit, if not, don't hesitate to ask, -gjb-

Log In?

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://209022]
[oiskuu]: Someone needs to re-read How do I use the power of consideration responsibly? carefully. Consideration is not intended for stamping out humor, AFAIK.
[oiskuu]: E.g. Re^3: Big thank you to the Perl community. is surely dry humor (not mine). Don't they teach humor in german schools!?
[LanX]: you don't see the whole picture
[LanX]: But reu germans have no humor, better to refrain from this site till the troll is gone...
[LanX]: true

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others lurking in the Monastery: (11)
As of 2017-04-27 19:53 GMT
Find Nodes?
    Voting Booth?
    I'm a fool:

    Results (512 votes). Check out past polls.