I am writing a simple scanner in flex. I want my scanner to print out "integer type seen" when it sees the keyword "int". Is there any difference between the following two ways?
1st way:
%%
int printf("integer type seen");
%%
2nd way:
%%
"int" printf("integer type seen");
%%
So, is there a difference between writing if or "if"? Also, for example when we see a == operator, we print something. Is there a difference between writing == or "==" in the flex file?
There's no difference in these specific cases -- the quotes(") just tell lex to NOT interpret any special characters (eg, for regular expressions) in the quoted string, but if there are no special characters involved, they don't matter:
[a-z] printf("matched a single letter\n");
"[a-z]" printf("matched the 5-character string '[a-z]'\n");
0* printf("matched zero or more zero characters\n");
"0*" printf("matched a zero followed by an asterisk\n");
Characters that are special and mean something different outside of quotes include . * + ? | ^ $ < > [ ] ( ) { } /. Some of those only have special meaning if they appear at certain places, but its generally clearer to quote them regardless of where they appear if you want to match the literal characters.
Related
I am having a hard time with this problem.
"Write a flex code which recognizes a chain with alphabet {0,1}, with at least 5 char's, and to every consecutive 5 char's there will bee at least 3 1's"
I thought I have solved, but I am new using flex, so I am getting this "flex scanner push-back overflow".
here's my code
%{
#define ACCEPT 1
#define DONT 2
%}
delim [ \t\n\r]
ws {delim}+
comb01 00111|{comb06}1
comb02 01011|{comb07}1
comb03 01101|{comb08}1
comb04 01110|({comb01}|{comb09})0
comb05 01111|({comb01}|{comb09})1
comb06 10011|{comb10}1
comb07 10101|{comb11}1
comb08 10110|({comb02}|{comb12})0
comb09 10111|({comb02}|{comb12})1
comb10 11001|{comb13}1
comb11 11010|({comb03}|{comb14})0
comb12 11011|({comb03}|{comb14})1
comb13 11100|({comb04}|{comb15})0
comb14 11101|({comb04}|{comb15})1
comb15 11110|({comb05}|{comb16})0
comb16 11111|({comb05}|{comb16})1
accept {comb01}|{comb02}|{comb03}|{comb04}|{comb05}|{comb06}|{comb07}|{comb08}|{comb09}|{comb10}|{comb11}|{comb12}|{comb13}|{comb14}|{comb15}|{comb16}
string [^ \t\n\r]+
%%
{ws} { ;}
{accept} {return ACCEPT;}
{string} {return DONT;}
%%
void main () {
int i;
while (i = yylex ())
switch (i) {
case ACCEPT:
printf ("%-20s: ACCEPT\n", yytext);
break;
case DONT:
printf ("%-20s: Reject\n", yytext);
break;
}
}
Flex definitions are macros, and flex implements them that way: when it sees {defn} in a pattern, it replaces it with whatever defn was defined as (in parentheses, usually, to avoid operator precedence issues). It doesn't expand the macros in the macro definition, so the macro substitution might contain more definition references which in turn need to be substituted.
Since macro substitution is unconditional, it is not possible to use recursive macros, including macros which are indirectly recursive. Which yours are. Flex doesn't check for this condition, unlike the C preprocessor; it just continues substituting in an endless loop until it runs out of space.
(Flex is implemented using itself; it does the macro substitution using unput. unput will not resize the input buffer, so "runs out of space" here means that flex's internal flex's input buffer became full of macro substitutions.)
The strategy you are using would work fine as a context-free grammar. But that's not flex. Flex is about regular expressions. The pattern you want to match can be described by a regular expression -- the "grammar" you wrote with flex macros is a regular grammar -- but it is not a regular expression and flex won't make one out of it for you, unfortunately. That's your job.
I don't think it's going to be a very pretty regular expression. In fact, I think it's likely to be enormous. But I didn't try working it out..
There are flex tricks you could use to avoid constructing the regular expression. For example, you could build your state machine out of flex start conditions and then scan one character at a time, where each character scanned does a state transition or throws an error. (Use more() if you want to return the entire string scanned at the end.)
I am trying to create a Lexer/Parser with ANTLR that can parse plain text with 'tags' scattered inbetween.
These tags are denoted by opening ({) and closing (}) brackets and they represent Java objects that can evaluate to a string, that is then replaced in the original input to create a dynamic template of sorts.
Here is an example:
{player:name} says hi!
The {player:name} should be replaced by the name of the player and result in the output i.e. Mark says hi! for the player named Mark.
Now I can recognize and parse the tags just fine, what I have problems with is the text that comes after.
This is the grammar I use:
grammar : content+
content : tag
| literal
;
tag : player_tag
| <...>
| <other kinds of tags, not important for this example>
| <...>
;
player_tag : BRACKET_OPEN player_identifier SEMICOLON player_string_parameter BRACKET_CLOSE ;
player_string_parameter : NAME
| <...>
;
player_identifier : PLAYER ;
literal : NUMBER
| STRING
;
BRACKET_OPEN : '{';
BRACKET_CLOSE : '}';
PLAYER : 'player'
NAME : 'name'
NUMBER : <...>
STRING : (.+)? /* <- THIS IS THE PROBLEMATIC PART !*/
Now this STRING Lexer definition should match anything that is not an empty string but the problem is that it is too greedy and then also consumes the { } bracket tokens needed for the tag rule.
I have tried setting it to ~[{}]+ which is supposed to match anything that does not include the { } brackets but that screws with the tag parsing which I don't understand either.
I could set it to something like [ a-zA-Z0-9!"ยง$%&/()= etc...]+ but I really don't want to restrict it to parse only characters available on the british keyboard (German umlaute or French accents and all other special characters other languages have must to work!)
The only thing that somewhat works though I really dislike it is to force strings to have a prefix and a suffix like so:
STRING : '\'' ~[}{]+ '\'' ;
This forces me to alter the form from "{player:name} says hi!" to "{player:name}' says hi!'" and I really desperately want to avoid such restrictions because I would then have to account for literal ' characters in the string itself and it's just ugly to work with.
The two solutions I have in mind are the following:
- Is there any way to match any number of characters that has not been matched by the lexer as a STRING token and pass it to the parser? That way I could match all the tags and say the rest of the input is just plain text, give it back to me as a STRING token or whatever...
- Does ANTLR support lookahead and lookbehind regex expressions with which I could match any number of characters before the first '{', after the last '}' and anything inbetween '}' and '{' ?
I have tried
STRING : (?<=})(.+)?(?={) ;
but I can't seem to get the syntax right because that won't compile at all, which leads me to believe that ANTLR does not support lookahead and lookbehind syntax, but I could not find a definitive answer on the internet to that question.
Any advice on what to do?
Antlr does not support lookahead or lookbehind. It does support non-greedy wildcard matches, but only when the .* non-greedy wildcard is followed in the rule with the termination sequence (which, as you say, is also contained in the match, although you could push it back into the input stream).
So ~[{}]* is correct. But there's a little problem: lexer rules are (normally) always active. So that lexer rule will be active inside the braces as well, which means that it will swallow the entire contents between the braces (unless there are nested braces or braces inside quotes or some such, and that's even worse).
So you need to define different lexical contents, called "lexical modes" in Antlr. There's a publically viewable example in the Antlr Definitive Reference, which shows a solution to a very similar problem: parsing HTML.
I need a regular expression able to match everything but a string starting with a specific pattern (specifically index.php and what follows, like index.php?id=2342343).
Regex: match everything but:
a string starting with a specific pattern (e.g. any - empty, too - string not starting with foo):
Lookahead-based solution for NFAs:
^(?!foo).*$
^(?!foo)
Negated character class based solution for regex engines not supporting lookarounds:
^(([^f].{2}|.[^o].|.{2}[^o]).*|.{0,2})$
^([^f].{2}|.[^o].|.{2}[^o])|^.{0,2}$
a string ending with a specific pattern (say, no world. at the end):
Lookbehind-based solution:
(?<!world\.)$
^.*(?<!world\.)$
Lookahead solution:
^(?!.*world\.$).*
^(?!.*world\.$)
POSIX workaround:
^(.*([^w].{5}|.[^o].{4}|.{2}[^r].{3}|.{3}[^l].{2}|.{4}[^d].|.{5}[^.])|.{0,5})$
([^w].{5}|.[^o].{4}|.{2}[^r].{3}|.{3}[^l].{2}|.{4}[^d].|.{5}[^.]$|^.{0,5})$
a string containing specific text (say, not match a string having foo):
Lookaround-based solution:
^(?!.*foo)
^(?!.*foo).*$
POSIX workaround:
Use the online regex generator at www.formauri.es/personal/pgimeno/misc/non-match-regex
a string containing specific character (say, avoid matching a string having a | symbol):
^[^|]*$
a string equal to some string (say, not equal to foo):
Lookaround-based:
^(?!foo$)
^(?!foo$).*$
POSIX:
^(.{0,2}|.{4,}|[^f]..|.[^o].|..[^o])$
a sequence of characters:
PCRE (match any text but cat): /cat(*SKIP)(*FAIL)|[^c]*(?:c(?!at)[^c]*)*/i or /cat(*SKIP)(*FAIL)|(?:(?!cat).)+/is
Other engines allowing lookarounds: (cat)|[^c]*(?:c(?!at)[^c]*)* (or (?s)(cat)|(?:(?!cat).)*, or (cat)|[^c]+(?:c(?!at)[^c]*)*|(?:c(?!at)[^c]*)+[^c]*) and then check with language means: if Group 1 matched, it is not what we need, else, grab the match value if not empty
a certain single character or a set of characters:
Use a negated character class: [^a-z]+ (any char other than a lowercase ASCII letter)
Matching any char(s) but |: [^|]+
Demo note: the newline \n is used inside negated character classes in demos to avoid match overflow to the neighboring line(s). They are not necessary when testing individual strings.
Anchor note: In many languages, use \A to define the unambiguous start of string, and \z (in Python, it is \Z, in JavaScript, $ is OK) to define the very end of the string.
Dot note: In many flavors (but not POSIX, TRE, TCL), . matches any char but a newline char. Make sure you use a corresponding DOTALL modifier (/s in PCRE/Boost/.NET/Python/Java and /m in Ruby) for the . to match any char including a newline.
Backslash note: In languages where you have to declare patterns with C strings allowing escape sequences (like \n for a newline), you need to double the backslashes escaping special characters so that the engine could treat them as literal characters (e.g. in Java, world\. will be declared as "world\\.", or use a character class: "world[.]"). Use raw string literals (Python r'\bworld\b'), C# verbatim string literals #"world\.", or slashy strings/regex literal notations like /world\./.
You could use a negative lookahead from the start, e.g., ^(?!foo).*$ shouldn't match anything starting with foo.
You can put a ^ in the beginning of a character set to match anything but those characters.
[^=]*
will match everything but =
Just match /^index\.php/, and then reject whatever matches it.
In Python:
>>> import re
>>> p='^(?!index\.php\?[0-9]+).*$'
>>> s1='index.php?12345'
>>> re.match(p,s1)
>>> s2='index.html?12345'
>>> re.match(p,s2)
<_sre.SRE_Match object at 0xb7d65fa8>
Came across this thread after a long search. I had this problem for multiple searches and replace of some occurrences. But the pattern I used was matching till the end. Example below
import re
text = "start![image]xxx(xx.png) yyy xx![image]xxx(xxx.png) end"
replaced_text = re.sub(r'!\[image\](.*)\(.*\.png\)', '*', text)
print(replaced_text)
gave
start* end
Basically, the regex was matching from the first ![image] to the last .png, swallowing the middle yyy
Used the method posted above https://stackoverflow.com/a/17761124/429476 by Firish to break the match between the occurrence. Here the space is not matched; as the words are separated by space.
replaced_text = re.sub(r'!\[image\]([^ ]*)\([^ ]*\.png\)', '*', text)
and got what I wanted
start* yyy xx* end
Trying to parse operators (+, -, =, <<, !=), using states like
%{
%}
OP ["+"|";"|":"|","|"*"|"/"|"="|"("|")"|"{"|"}"|"*"|"#"|"$"|
"<"|">"|"&"|"|"|"!"|]
DOUBOP [":="|".."|"<<"|">>"|"<>"|"<="|">="|"=>"|"**"|"!="|"{:"|"}:"|"\-"]
and later on
{DOUBOP} { printf("%s (operator)\n", yytext); }
{OP} { printf("%s (operator)\n", yytext); }
but Lex is identifying operators like "<<" as "<" and "<". I thought since it was in double quotes this would work, but I see that's not the case.
Is there anyway I can give a regular expression precedence, ie have lex check for a double operator first, and then a single operator?
Thanks in advance.
[...] is a character class, not an eccentric type of parenthesis. If you want to parenthesize a sub-expression in a pattern, use ordinary parentheses. In this case, however, parentheses are not necessary. (Indeed, most of the quotes aren't necessary either, but they don't hurt and some of them would be useful.)
"==" recognises the two character-sequence consisting of two equal signs. "=="|"++" recognizes either two equal signs or two plus signs.
By contrast, ["=="] recognises a single character, which could be either a quote or an equals sign. Since a character class is a set, the fact that each of those appears twice is irrelevant (although I think it would save a lot of grief if flex issued a warning). Similarly, ["=="|"<<"] recognises a single character if it is a quote, an equals sign, a vertical bar or a less than sign.
Flex pattern syntax is documented in the flex manual. It differs in a few ways from regexes in other systems, so it's worth reading the short document. However, character classes are mostly the same in all regex syntaxes in common use, especially the use of square brackets to delimit the set.
An easier way is to put all single characters together, and run the * command on the end up curly braces.
i.e.
OP ["+"|";"|":"|","|"*"|"/"|"="|"("|")"|"{"|"}"|"*"|"#"|"$"|
"<"|">"|"&"|"|"|"!"|]*
I am trying to use the regular expression (?r-s:pattern) as mentioned in the Flex manual.
Following code works only when i input small letter 'a' and not the caps 'A'
%%
[(?i:a)] { printf("color"); }
\n { printf("NEWLINE\n"); return EOL;}
. { printf("Mystery character %s\n", yytext); }
%%
OUTPUT
a
colorNEWLINE
A
Mystery character A
NEWLINE
Reverse is also true i.e. if i change the line (?i:a) to (?i:A) it only considers 'A' as valid input and not 'a'.
If I remove the square brackets i.e. [] it gives error as
"ex1.lex", line 2: unrecognized rule
If I enclose the "(?i:a)" then it compiles but after executing it always goes to last rule i.e. "Mystery character..."
Please let me know how to use it properly.
I guess I am late.. :) Anyway, which flex version are you using, I have version 2.5.35 installed and correctly recognizes above pattern. Perhaps you're using old version!!!
Now regarding the enclosing with [] brackets. It works because as per [] regex rule it will try to match any of individual (, ?, i, :, a or ). Thats why a gets recognized and not A (because it is not in the list).
The way I read the manual, the rule without the square brackets should perform the case-insensitive matching you're looking for--I can't explain why you get an error at compile time. But you can achieve the same behavior in one of two ways. One, you can enumerate the upper and lower case characters in the character class:
%%
[Aa] { printf("color"); }
%%
Two, you can specify the case-insensitive scanner option, either on the command line as -i or --case-insensitive or in your .l file:
%%
%option case-insensitive
[a] {printf("color"); }
%%