I'm new to Haskell and I am trying to parse expressions. I found out about Parsec and I also found some articles but I don't seem to understand what I have to do. My problem is that I want to give an expression like "x^2+2*x+3" and the result to be a function that takes an argument x and returns a value. I am very sorry if this is an easy question but I really need some help. Thanks! The code I inserted is from the article that you can find on this link.
import Control.Monad(liftM)
import Text.ParserCombinators.Parsec
import Text.ParserCombinators.Parsec.Expr
import Text.ParserCombinators.Parsec.Token
import Text.ParserCombinators.Parsec.Language
data Expr = Num Int | Var String | Add Expr Expr
| Sub Expr Expr | Mul Expr Expr | Div Expr Expr
| Pow Expr Expr
deriving Show
expr :: Parser Expr
expr = buildExpressionParser table factor
<?> "expression"
table = [[op "^" Pow AssocRight],
[op "*" Mul AssocLeft, op "/" Div AssocLeft],
[op "+" Add AssocLeft, op "-" Sub AssocLeft]]
where
op s f assoc
= Infix (do{ string s; return f}) assoc
factor = do{ char '('
; x <- expr
; char ')'
; return x}
<|> number
<|> variable
<?> "simple expression"
number :: Parser Expr
number = do{ ds<- many1 digit
; return (Num (read ds))}
<?> "number"
variable :: Parser Expr
variable = do{ ds<- many1 letter
; return (Var ds)}
<?> "variable"
This is just a parser for expressions with variables. Actually interpreting the expression is an entirely separate matter.
You should create a function that takes an already parsed expression and values for variables, and returns the result of evaluating the expression. Pseudocode:
evaluate :: Expr -> Map String Int -> Int
evaluate (Num n) _ = n
evaluate (Var x) vars = {- Look up the value of x in vars -}
evaluate (Plus e f) vars = {- Evaluate e and f, and return their sum -}
...
I've deliberately omitted some details; hopefully by exploring the missing parts, you learn more about Haskell.
As a next step, you should probably look at the Reader monad for a convenient way to pass the variable map vars around, and using Maybe or Error to signal errors, e.g. referencing a variable that is not bound in vars, or division by zero.
Related
I'm trying to make an expression evaluator in Hakell:
data Parser i o
= Success o [i]
| Failure String [i]
| Parser
{parse :: [i] -> Parser i o}
data Operator = Add | Sub | Mul | Div | Pow
data Expr
= Op Operator Expr Expr
| Val Double
expr :: Parser Char Expr
expr = add_sub
where
add_sub = calc Add '+' mul_div <|> calc Sub '-' mul_div <|> mul_div
mul_div = calc Mul '*' pow <|> calc Div '/' pow <|> pow
pow = calc Pow '^' factor <|> factor
factor = parens <|> val
val = Val <$> parseDouble
parens = parseChar '(' *> expr <* parseChar ')'
calc c o p = Op c <$> (p <* parseChar o) <*> p
My problem is that when I try to evaluate an expression with two operators with same priority (e.g. 1+1-1) the parser will fail.
How can I say that an add_sub can be an operation between two other add_subs without creating an infinite loop?
As explained by #chi the problem is that calc was using p twice which doesn't allow for patterns like muldiv + .... | muldiv - ... | ...
I just changed the definition of calc to :
calc c o p p2 = Op c <$> (p <* parseChar o) <*> p2
where p2 is the current priority (mul_div in the definition of mul_div)
it works much better but the order of calulations is backwards:
2/3/4 is parsed as 2/(3/4) instead of (2/3)/4
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 5 years ago.
Improve this question
I've created a custom datatype Expr
type Name = String
type Domain = [Integer]
data Expr = Val Integer
| Var Name
| Expr :+: Expr
| Expr :-: Expr
| Expr :*: Expr
| Expr :/: Expr
| Expr :%: Expr
deriving Eq
I need to create a parser that creates a datatype Expr from an string without using a parser library in Haskell.
I've created the parser for the initial string that accepts a string of the form "2*a+b" and converts it to the form "Val 2 :*: Var "a" :+: Var "b" " that is accepted by the Expr but this is where I don't know that to do in order to go further. My problem is that I don't know how to create an Expr from a such a string without a parser library.
import Control.Applicative (Alternative (empty, many, some, (<|>)), (<**>))
import Data.Char (isSpace, isDigit)
import Data.Maybe (listToMaybe)
Writing a basic, inefficient parsing library is actually not that hard and can be done in under 50 lines of code. The core type looks like this:
newtype Parser a = Parser (String -> [(a, String)])
parse :: Parser a -> String -> Maybe a
parse (Parser p) s = listToMaybe $ fst <$> p s
This parser partially consumes a string and returns a parsed result a along with the remainder string. But there may be many parsing alternatives, which is why it returns a list of results and remainders.
For working with this type we need a few more utilities. I left the _s for you to implement.
instance Functor Parser where
fmap (Parser p) = _
instance Applicative Parser where
pure a = Parser $ \s -> (a, s) -- Consumes nothing and returns a
Parser pf <*> Parser pa = _ -- Parse pf, then parse pa and apply the result
-- of pf to that of pa.
instance Alternative Parser where
empty = Parser $ \s -> [] -- Matches nothing
Parser p1 <|> Parser p2 = _ -- Matches either p1 or if that fails p2.
satisfy :: (Char -> Bool) -> Parser Char
satisfy = _
space :: Parser ()
space = () <$ satisfy isSpace
spaces :: Parser ()
spaces = () <$ many space
char :: Char -> Parser Char
char c = satisfy (c ==)
-- | Detects the end of file.
eof :: Parser ()
eof = _
-- | Succeeds when at the end of a word, without consuming any input
eow :: Parser ()
eow = _
Now we can go ahead and use this parser like any recursive descent parser:
data Expr = Val Integer
| Expr :*: Expr
| Expr :+: Expr
deriving Show
parseVal :: Parser Expr
parseVal =
char '(' *> parseAdd <* char ')' <|>
Val . read <$> some (satisfy isDigit) <* eow
parseMul :: Parser Expr
parseMul = _
parseAdd :: Parser Expr
parseAdd = _
parseExpr :: Parser Expr
parseExpr = parseAdd <* eof
The BNF that match function call chain (like x(y)(z)...):
expr = term T
T = (expr) T
| EMPTY
term = (expr)
| VAR
Translate it to Parsec program that looks so tricky.
term :: Parser Term
term = parens expr <|> var
expr :: Parser Term
expr = do whiteSpace
e <- term
maybeAddSuffix e
where addSuffix e0 = do e1 <- parens expr
maybeAddSuffix $ TermApp e0 e1
maybeAddSuffix e = addSuffix e
<|> return e
Could you list all the design patterns about translating BNF to Parsec program?
The simplest think you could do if your grammar is sizeable is to just use the Alex/Happy combo. It is fairly straightforward to use, accepts the BNF format directly - no human translation needed - and perhaps most importantly, produces blazingly fast parsers/lexers.
If you are dead set on doing it with parsec (or you are doing this as a learning exercise), I find it easier in general to do it in two stages; first lexing, then parsing. Parsec will do both!
First write the appropriate types:
{-# LANGUAGE LambdaCase #-}
import Text.Parsec
import Text.Parsec.Combinator
import Text.Parsec.Prim
import Text.Parsec.Pos
import Text.ParserCombinators.Parsec.Char
import Control.Applicative hiding ((<|>))
import Control.Monad
data Term = App Term Term | Var String deriving (Show, Eq)
data Token = LParen | RParen | Str String deriving (Show, Eq)
type Lexer = Parsec [Char] () -- A lexer accepts a stream of Char
type Parser = Parsec [Token] () -- A parser accepts a stream of Token
Parsing a single token is simple. For simplicity, a variable is 1 or more letters. You can of course change this however you like.
oneToken :: Lexer Token
oneToken = (char '(' >> return LParen) <|>
(char ')' >> return RParen) <|>
(Str <$> many1 letter)
Parsing the entire token stream is just parsing a single token many times, possible separated by whitespace:
lexer :: Lexer [Token]
lexer = spaces >> many1 (oneToken <* spaces)
Note the placement of spaces: this way, white space is accepted at the beginning and end of the string.
Since Parser uses a custom token type, you have to use a custom satisfy function. Fortunately, this is almost identical to the existing satisfy.
satisfy' :: (Token -> Bool) -> Parser Token
satisfy' f = tokenPrim show
(\src _ _ -> incSourceColumn src 1)
(\x -> if f x then Just x else Nothing)
Then we can write parsers for each of the primitive tokens.
lparen = satisfy' $ \case { LParen -> True ; _ -> False }
rparen = satisfy' $ \case { RParen -> True ; _ -> False }
strTok = (\(Str s) -> s) <$> (satisfy' $ \case { Str {} -> True ; _ -> False })
As you may imagine, parens would be useful for our purposes. It is very straightforward to write.
parens :: Parser a -> Parser a
parens = between lparen rparen
Now the interesting parts.
term, expr, var :: Parser Term
term = parens expr <|> var
var = Var <$> strTok
These two should be fairly obvious to you.
Parec contains combinators option and optionMaybe which are useful when you you need to "maybe do something".
expr = do
e0 <- term
option e0 (parens expr >>= \e1 -> return (App e0 e1))
The last line means - try to apply the parser given to option - if it fails, instead return e0.
For testing you can do:
tokAndParse = runParser (lexer <* eof) () "" >=> runParser (expr <* eof) () ""
The eof attached to each parser is to make sure that the entire input is consumed; the string cannot be a member of the grammar if there are extra trailing characters. Note - your example x(y)(z) is not actually in your grammar!
>tokAndParse "x(y)(z)"
Left (line 1, column 5):
unexpected LParen
expecting end of input
But the following is
>tokAndParse "(x(y))(z)"
Right (App (App (Var "x") (Var "y")) (Var "z"))
I am trying to learn how can I do a parser for expressions in Haskell and I found this code (below), but I don't even know how to use it.
I tried with: expr (Add (Num 5) (Num 2)) , but it needs a "Parser" data type.
import Text.Parsec
import Text.Parsec.String
import Text.Parsec.Expr
import Text.Parsec.Token
import Text.Parsec.Language
data Expr = Num Int | Var String | Add Expr Expr | Sub Expr Expr | Mul Expr Expr | Div Expr Expr deriving Show
expr :: Parser Expr
expr = buildExpressionParser table factor
<?> "expression"
table = [[op "*" Mul AssocLeft, op "/" Div AssocLeft],
[op "+" Add AssocLeft, op "-" Sub AssocLeft]]
where
op s f assoc = Infix (do{ string s; return f}) assoc
factor = do{ char '('
; x <- expr
; char ')'
; return x}
<|> number
<|> variable
<?> "simple expression"
number :: Parser Expr
number = do{ ds<- many1 digit
; return (Num (read ds))}
<?> "number"
variable :: Parser Expr
variable = do{ ds<- many1 letter
; return (Var ds)}
<?> "variable"
Solution: readExpr input = parse expr "name for error messages" input
and use readExpr.
You can use the function parse which will run a Parser on an input string and return an Either ParseError Expr. I put a simple usage below where I turn that ParseError into a string and pass it along
readExpr :: String -> Either String Expr
readExpr input = case parse expr "name for error messages" input of
Left err -> Left $ "Oh noes parsers are failing: " ++ show err -- Handle error
Right a -> Right a -- Handle success
There are a few other functions, such as parseFromFile, which let you shorthand a few common patterns, to find them, check out the parsec haddock
I'm trying to learn Parsec by implementing a small regular expression parser. In BNF, my grammar looks something like:
EXP : EXP *
| LIT EXP
| LIT
I've tried to implement this in Haskell as:
expr = try star
<|> try litE
<|> lit
litE = do c <- noneOf "*"
rest <- expr
return (c : rest)
lit = do c <- noneOf "*"
return [c]
star = do content <- expr
char '*'
return (content ++ "*")
There are some infinite loops here though (e.g. expr -> star -> expr without consuming any tokens) which makes the parser loop forever. I'm not really sure how to fix it though, because the very nature of star is that it consumes its mandatory token at the end.
Any thoughts?
You should use Parsec.Expr.buildExprParser; it is ideal for this purpose. You simply describe your operators, their precedence and associativity, and how to parse an atom, and the combinator builds the parser for you!
You probably also want to add the ability to group terms with parens so that you can apply * to more than just a single literal.
Here's my attempt (I threw in |, +, and ? for good measure):
import Control.Applicative
import Control.Monad
import Text.ParserCombinators.Parsec
import Text.ParserCombinators.Parsec.Expr
data Term = Literal Char
| Sequence [Term]
| Repeat (Int, Maybe Int) Term
| Choice [Term]
deriving ( Show )
term :: Parser Term
term = buildExpressionParser ops atom where
ops = [ [ Postfix (Repeat (0, Nothing) <$ char '*')
, Postfix (Repeat (1, Nothing) <$ char '+')
, Postfix (Repeat (0, Just 1) <$ char '?')
]
, [ Infix (return sequence) AssocRight
]
, [ Infix (choice <$ char '|') AssocRight
]
]
atom = msum [ Literal <$> lit
, parens term
]
lit = noneOf "*+?|()"
sequence a b = Sequence $ (seqTerms a) ++ (seqTerms b)
choice a b = Choice $ (choiceTerms a) ++ (choiceTerms b)
parens = between (char '(') (char ')')
seqTerms (Sequence ts) = ts
seqTerms t = [t]
choiceTerms (Choice ts) = ts
choiceTerms t = [t]
main = parseTest term "he(llo)*|wor+ld?"
Your grammar is left-recursive, which doesn’t play nice with try, as Parsec will repeatedly backtrack. There are a few ways around this. Probably the simplest is just making the * optional in another rule:
lit :: Parser (Char, Maybe Char)
lit = do
c <- noneOf "*"
s <- optionMaybe $ char '*'
return (c, s)
Of course, you’ll probably end up wrapping things in a data type anyway, and there are a lot of ways to go about it. Here’s one, off the top of my head:
import Control.Applicative ((<$>))
data Term = Literal Char
| Sequence [Term]
| Star Term
expr :: Parser Term
expr = Sequence <$> many term
term :: Parser Term
term = do
c <- lit
s <- optionMaybe $ char '*' -- Easily extended for +, ?, etc.
return $ if isNothing s
then Literal c
else Star $ Literal c
Maybe a more experienced Haskeller will come along with a better solution.