Any suggestions about how to implement a BASIC language parser/interpreter? - parsing

Question

I've been trying to implement a BASIC language interpreter (in C/C++) but I haven't found any book or (thorough) article which explains the process of parsing the language constructs. Some commands are rather complex and hard to parse, especially conditionals and loops, such as IF-THEN-ELSE and FOR-STEP-NEXT, because they can mix variables with constants and entire expressions and code and everything else, for example:
10 IF X = Y + Z THEN GOTO 20 ELSE GOSUB P
20 FOR A = 10 TO B STEP -C : PRINT C$ : PRINT WHATEVER
30 NEXT A
It seems like a nightmare to be able to parse something like that and make it work. And to make things worse, programs written in BASIC can easily be a tangled mess. That's why I need some advice, read some book or whatever to make my mind clear about this subject. What can you suggest?

Answer 1

You've picked a great project - writing interpreters can be lots of fun!
But first, what do we even mean by an interpreter? There are different types of interpreters.
There is the pure interpreter, where you simply interpret each language element as you find it. These are the easiest to write, and the slowest.
A step up, would be to convert each language element into some sort of internal form, and then interpret that. Still pretty easy to write.
The next step, would be to actually parse the language, and generate a syntax tree, and then interpret that. This is somewhat harder to write, but once you've done it a few times, it becomes pretty easy.
Once you have a syntax tree, you can fairly easily generate code for a custom stack virtual machine. A much harder project is to generate code for an existing virtual machine, such as the JVM or CLR.
In programming, like most engineering endeavors, careful planning greatly helps, especially with complicated projects.
So the first step is to decide which type of interpreter you wish to write. If you have not read any of a number of compiler books (e.g., I always recommend Niklaus Wirth's "Compiler Construction" as one of the best introductions to the subject, and is now freely available on the web in PDF form), I would recommend that you go with the pure interpreter.
But you still need to do some additional planning. You need to rigorously define what it is you are going to be interpreting. EBNF is great for this. For a gentile introduction EBNF, read the first three parts of a Simple Compiler at http://www.semware.com/html/compiler.html It is written at the high school level, and should be easy to digest. Yes, I tried it on my kids first :-)
Once you have defined what it is you want to be interpreting, you are ready to write your interpreter.
Abstractly, you're simple interpreter will be divided into a scanner (technically, a lexical analyzer), a parser, and an evaluator. In the simple pure interpolator case, the parser and evaluator will be combined.
Scanners are easy to write, and easy to test, so we won't spend any time on them. See the aforementioned link for info on crafting a simple scanner.
Lets (for example) define your goto statement:
gotostmt -> 'goto' integer
integer -> [0-9]+
This tells us that when we see the token 'goto' (as delivered by the scanner), the only thing that can follow is an integer. And an integer is simply a string a digits.
In pseudo code, we might handle this as so:
(token - is the current token, which is the current element just returned via the scanner)
loop
if token == "goto"
goto_stmt()
elseif token == "gosub"
gosub_stmt()
elseif token == .....
endloop
proc goto_stmt()
expect("goto") -- redundant, but used to skip over goto
if is_numeric(token)
--now, somehow set the instruction pointer at the requested line
else
error("expecting a line number, found '%s'\n", token)
end
end
proc expect(s)
if s == token
getsym()
return true
end
error("Expecting '%s', found: '%s'\n", curr_token, s)
end
See how simple it is? Really, the only hard thing to figure out in a simple interpreter is the handling of expressions. A good recipe for handling those is at: http://www.engr.mun.ca/~theo/Misc/exp_parsing.htm Combined with the aforementioned references, you should have enough to handle the sort of expressions you would encounter in BASIC.
Ok, time for a concrete example. This is from a larger 'pure interpreter', that handles a enhanced version of Tiny BASIC (but big enough to run Tiny Star Trek :-) )
/*------------------------------------------------------------------------
Simple example, pure interpreter, only supports 'goto'
------------------------------------------------------------------------*/
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <stdarg.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <setjmp.h>
#include <ctype.h>
enum {False=0, True=1, Max_Lines=300, Max_Len=130};
char *text[Max_Lines+1]; /* array of program lines */
int textp; /* used by scanner - ptr in current line */
char tok[Max_Len+1]; /* the current token */
int cur_line; /* the current line number */
int ch; /* current character */
int num; /* populated if token is an integer */
jmp_buf restart;
int error(const char *fmt, ...) {
va_list ap;
char buf[200];
va_start(ap, fmt);
vsprintf(buf, fmt, ap);
va_end(ap);
printf("%s\n", buf);
longjmp(restart, 1);
return 0;
}
int is_eol(void) {
return ch == '\0' || ch == '\n';
}
void get_ch(void) {
ch = text[cur_line][textp];
if (!is_eol())
textp++;
}
void getsym(void) {
char *cp = tok;
while (ch <= ' ') {
if (is_eol()) {
*cp = '\0';
return;
}
get_ch();
}
if (isalpha(ch)) {
for (; !is_eol() && isalpha(ch); get_ch()) {
*cp++ = (char)ch;
}
*cp = '\0';
} else if (isdigit(ch)) {
for (; !is_eol() && isdigit(ch); get_ch()) {
*cp++ = (char)ch;
}
*cp = '\0';
num = atoi(tok);
} else
error("What? '%c'", ch);
}
void init_getsym(const int n) {
cur_line = n;
textp = 0;
ch = ' ';
getsym();
}
void skip_to_eol(void) {
tok[0] = '\0';
while (!is_eol())
get_ch();
}
int accept(const char s[]) {
if (strcmp(tok, s) == 0) {
getsym();
return True;
}
return False;
}
int expect(const char s[]) {
return accept(s) ? True : error("Expecting '%s', found: %s", s, tok);
}
int valid_line_num(void) {
if (num > 0 && num <= Max_Lines)
return True;
return error("Line number must be between 1 and %d", Max_Lines);
}
void goto_line(void) {
if (valid_line_num())
init_getsym(num);
}
void goto_stmt(void) {
if (isdigit(tok[0]))
goto_line();
else
error("Expecting line number, found: '%s'", tok);
}
void do_cmd(void) {
for (;;) {
while (tok[0] == '\0') {
if (cur_line == 0 || cur_line >= Max_Lines)
return;
init_getsym(cur_line + 1);
}
if (accept("bye")) {
printf("That's all folks!\n");
exit(0);
} else if (accept("run")) {
init_getsym(1);
} else if (accept("goto")) {
goto_stmt();
} else {
error("Unknown token '%s' at line %d", tok, cur_line); return;
}
}
}
int main() {
int i;
for (i = 0; i <= Max_Lines; i++) {
text[i] = calloc(sizeof(char), (Max_Len + 1));
}
setjmp(restart);
for (;;) {
printf("> ");
while (fgets(text[0], Max_Len, stdin) == NULL)
;
if (text[0][0] != '\0') {
init_getsym(0);
if (isdigit(tok[0])) {
if (valid_line_num())
strcpy(text[num], &text[0][textp]);
} else
do_cmd();
}
}
}
Hopefully, that will be enough to get you started. Have fun!

Answer 2

I will certainly get beaten by telling this ...but...:
First, I am actually working on a standalone library ( as a hobby ) that is made of:
a tokenizer, building linear (flat list) of tokens from the source text and following the same sequence as the text ( lexems created from the text flow ).
A parser by hands (syntax analyse; pseudo-compiler )
There is no "pseudo-code" nor "virtual CPU/machine".
Instructions(such as 'return', 'if' 'for' 'while'... then arithemtic expressions ) are represented by a base c++-struct/class and is the object itself. The base object, I name it atom, have a virtual method called "eval", among other common members, that is the "execution/branch" also by itself. So no matter I have an 'if' statement with its possible branchings ( single statement or bloc of statements/instructions ) as true or false condition, it will be called from the base virtual atom::eval() ... and so on for everything that is an atom.
Even 'objects' such as variables are 'atom'. 'eval()' will simply return its value from a variant container held by the atom itself ( pointer, refering to the 'local' variant instance (the instance variant iself) held the 'atom' or to another variant held by an atom that is created in a given 'bloc/stack'. So 'atom' are 'inplace' instructions/objects.
As of now, as an example, chunk of not really meaningful 'code' as below just works:
r = 5!; // 5! : (factorial of 5 )
Response = 1 + 4 - 6 * --r * ((3+5)*(3-4) * 78);
if (Response != 1){ /* '<>' also is not equal op. */
return r^3;
}
else{
return 0;
}
Expressions ( arithemtics ) are built into binary tree expression:
A = b+c; =>
=
/ \
A +
/ \
b c
So the 'instruction'/statement for expression like above is the tree-entry atom that in the above case, is the '=' (binary) operator.
The tree is built with atom::r0,r1,r2 :
atom 'A' :
r0
|
A
/ \
r1 r2
Regarding 'full-duplex' mecanism between c++ runtime and the 'script' library, I've made class_adaptor and adaptor<> :
ex.:
template<typename R, typename ...Args> adaptor_t<T,R, Args...>& import_method(const lstring& mname, R (T::*prop)(Args...)) { ... }
template<typename R, typename ...Args> adaptor_t<T,R, Args...>& import_property(const lstring& mname, R (T::*prop)(Args...)) { ... }
Second: I know there are plenty of tools and libs out there such as lua, boost::bind<*>, QML, JSON, etc... But in my situation, I need to create my very own [edit] 'independant' [/edit] lib for "live scripting". I was scared that my 'interpreter' could take a huge amount of RAM, but I am surprised that it is not as big as using QML,jscript or even lua :-)
Thank you :-)

Answer 3

Don't bother with hacking a parser together by hand. Use a parser generator. lex + yacc is the classic lexer/parser generator combination, but a Google search will reveal plenty of others.