flex yy_fatal_error exist just like that. But I want handler back to my application. How to avoid exist call? from yy_fatal_error. whether this problem addressed in any version? your suggestion is highly appreciated. help me on this issues.
You can override the function, by #defineing your own. Note that in the generated code there is
/* Report a fatal error. */
#ifndef YY_FATAL_ERROR
#define YY_FATAL_ERROR(msg) yy_fatal_error( msg )
#endif
If you #define the macro YY_FATAL_ERROR(msg) to call your own function, the lexer will call that function rather than the one from the template.
However, the lexer template is written to assume that this function does not return. You can make it do that by using setjmp and longjmp to prepare a predictable place to return in your application and jumping back (from your own yy_fatal_error function) to that when a "fatal" error is used.
vi like emacs does this for instance, because it uses lexers for syntax highlighting. If a fatal error is generated by the lexer, you would not want the editor to stop.
Here are a few links discussing setjmp and longjmp:
Practical usage of setjmp and longjmp in C
setjmp and longjmp - understanding with examples
Related
I am evaluating Keil Microvision IDE on STM32H753.
I am doing compiler comparison between ARMCC5 and AC6 in the different optimisation levels. AC6 is based on Clang.
My code is not using memcpy and I have unchecked "Use MicroLIB" in the project settings , However a basic byte per byte copy loop in my code is replaced by a memcpy with AC6 (only in "high" optimisation levels). It doesn't happen with ARMCC5.
I tried using compilation options to avoid that, as described here: -ffreestanding and -disable-simplify-libcalls, at both compiler and linker levels but it didn't change (for the second option, I get an error message saying that the option is not supported).
In the ARMCLANG reference guide i've found the options -nostdlib -nostdlibinc that prevent (??) the compiler to use any function of a standard lib.
However I still need the math.h function.
Do you know how to prevent clang to use functions from the Standard C Lib that are not explicitely called in the code ?
EDIT: here is a quick and dirty reproduceable example:
https://godbolt.org/z/AX8_WV
Please do not discuss the quality of this example, I know it is dumb !!, I know about memset, etc... It is just to understand the issue
gcc know a lot about the memcpy, memset and similar functions and even they are called "the builtin functions". If you do not want those functions to be used by default just use the command line option -fno-builtin
https://godbolt.org/z/a42m4j
I am trying to parse c-clang index.h file with ClangSharp (just for testing purposes of ClangSharp parser on C#) and I found that it misses parsing of functions because of CINDEX_LINKAGE macro in the function declaration.
If I remove it, parser will correctly find FunctionDecl and parse it without errors.
I cannot understand how this macro preventing functions from being parsed. Does someone know how to workaround this?
Issue was in the #include line itself. By default, clang header includes setup to search in the directory on one level up, but clang itself by some reason does not understand such
include format.
I need to add headers to an already existing program by transforming it with LLVM and Clang.
I have used clang's rewriter to accomplish a similar thing in the changing function names and arguments, etc.
But the header files aren't present in clang's AST. I already know we need to use PPCallbacks (https://clang.llvm.org/doxygen/classclang_1_1PPCallbacks.html) but I am in dire need of some examples on how to make it work with the rewriter if at all possible.
Alternatively, adding a #include statement just before the first
using namespace <namespace>;
Also works. I would like to know an example of this as well.
Any help would be appreciated.
There is a bit of confusion in your question. You need to understand in details how the preprocessor works. Be aware that most of C++ compilation happens after the preprocessing phase (so most C++ static analyzers work after that phase).
In other words, the C++ specification (and also the C specification) defines first what is preprocessing, and then what is the syntax and the semantics of the preprocessed form.
In other words, when compiling foo.cc your compiler see the preprocessed form foo.ii that you could obtain with clang++ -C -E foo.cc > foo.ii
In the 1980s the preprocessor /lib/cpp was a separate program forked by the compiler (and some temporary foo.ii was sitting on the disk and removed at end of compilation). Today, it is -for performance reasons- some initial processing done inside the compiler. But you could reason as if it was still separate.
Either you want to alter the Clang compiler, and it deals (like every other C++ compiler or C++ static analyzer) mostly with the preprocessed form. Then you don't want to add new #include-s, but you want to alter the flow of AST given to the compiler (after preprocessing), and that is a different question: you then want to add some AST between existing AST elements (independently of any preprocessor directives).
Or you want to automatically change the C++ source code. The hard part is determining what you want to change and at what place. I suppose that you have used complex stuff to determine that a #include <vector> has to be inserted after line 34 of file foo.cc. Once you've got that information (and getting it is the hard thing), doing the insertion is pretty trivial. For example, you could read every C++ source line, and insert your line when you have read enough lines.
I'm using flex & bison to parse a custom language and I'm in the situation described here: http://www.gnu.org/software/bison/manual/html_node/How-Can-I-Reset-the-Parser.html.
To be more precise
I invoke yyparse several times, and on correct input it works
properly; but when a parse error is found, all the other calls fail
too. How can I reset the error flag of yyparse?
My parser and scanner run inside a separate thread, but there is only one thread working with the input file. In my understanding I don't need to write a reentrant scanner since there is only one thread working with the input file. In that page the problem is clearly explained but the solution is not clear to me.
It says:
Therefore, whenever you change yyin, you must tell the Lex-generated
scanner to discard its current buffer and switch to the new one. This
depends upon your implementation of Lex; see its documentation for
more. For Flex, it suffices to call ‘YY_FLUSH_BUFFER’ after each
change to yyin. If your Flex-generated scanner needs to read from
several input streams to handle features like include files, you might
consider using Flex functions like ‘yy_switch_to_buffer’ that
manipulate multiple input buffers
My parser thread calls yyparse in order to build my AST. What is not clear to me is when and where I have to call yy_flush_buffer to fix the problem. In my understanding the scanner code (generated by Flex) is called by the parser code (generated by Bison). The Bison generated code is generated by the grammar. As a result the parser code is not under my direct control. This means I cannot include the call to yy_flush_buffer into the parser code since it would be overwritten every time I generate the parser code by the grammar. It means that I should put the yy_flush_buffer in the grammr file somewhere. But where?
I fixed the problem by doing:
...
FILE *f = fopen(_filename, "r");
yyrestart(f);
yyparse();
...
I leave the question since it could be useful for other people.
I've read on the Lua wiki / here / etc. on how to sandbox lua code generally. But I haven't been able to find something that disallows function creation. For example, the example here provides a sample code as:
assert(run [[function f(x) return x^2 end; t={2}; t[1]=f(t[1])]])
And that's with an empty environment. But I want to eliminate the ability to create a function (the 1st part of the code) - e.g., just allow expressions. Any idea on how to do that? Does it have to be in C somehow? Thanks in advance!
If you want to evaluate expressions only, you could try this:
function run(s) return loadstring("return "..s)() end
(error handling omitted)
This simple solution will prevent most `attacks', but not eliminate them because one can say
(function () f=function(x) print"hello" end end)()
which defines a new function named f.
Your best bet is to use a sandbox and not worry about what the user does to the environment, because it'll not be your environment.
You can try detecting the creation of functions by looking for the string "function" before allowing the execution of the lua script. For example from your C/C++ backend.
If "function" appears throw a "you are not allowed to create functions" error and don't execute the code.
A couple notes:
You might want to try to customize the detection a bit more - only throw errors if you detect function followed by blanks and an opening parenthesis, for example. I'm leaving that as an exercise.
You should be aware that there are some standard lua functions that kindof expect the users to be able to create functions - for example, the string table has several of those. Without creating functions, it'll be very difficult for your users to work with strings (it is already difficult enough with functions...)