I'm using Text.ParserCombinators.Parsec and Text.XHtml to parse an input like this:
- First type A\n
-- First type B\n
- Second type A\n
-- First type B\n
--Second type B\n
And my output should be:
<h1>1 First type A\n</h1>
<h2>1.1 First type B\n</h2>
<h1>2 Second type A\n</h2>
<h2>2.1 First type B\n</h2>
<h2>2.2 Second type B\n</h2>
I have come to this part, but I cannot get any further:
title1= do{
;(count 1 (char '-'))
;s <- many1 anyChar newline
;return (h1 << s)
}
title2= do{
;(count 2 (char '--'))
;s <- many1 anyChar newline
;return (h1 << s)
}
text=do {
;many (choice [try(title1),try(title2)])
}
main :: IO ()
main = do t putStr "Error: " >> print err
Right x -> putStrLn $ prettyHtml x
This is ok, but it does not include the numbering.
Any ideas?
Thanks!
You probably want to use GenParser with a state containing the current section numbers as a list in reverse order, so section 1.2.3 will be represented as [3,2,1], and maybe the length of the list to avoid repeatedly counting it. Something like
data SectionState = SectionState {nums :: [Int], depth :: Int}
Then make your parser actions return type be "GenParser Char SectionState a". You can access the current state in your parser actions using "getState" and "setState". When you get a series of "-" at the start of a line count them and compare it with "depth" in the state, manipulate the "nums" list appropriately, and then emit "nums" in reverse order (I suggest keeping nums in reverse order because most of the time you want to access the least significant item, so putting it at the head of the list is both easier and more efficient).
See Text.ParserCombinators.Parsec.Prim for details of GenParser. The more usual Parser type is just "type Parser a = GenParser Char () a" You probably want to say
type MyParser a = GenParser Char SectionState a
somewhere near the start of your code.
Related
I am stuck at the following parsing problem:
Parse some text string that may contain zero or more elements from a limited character set, up to but not including one of a set of termination characters. Content/no content should be indicated through Maybe. Termination characters may appear in the string in escaped form. Parsing should fail on any inadmissible character.
This is what I came up with (simplified):
import qualified Text.Megaparsec as MP
-- Predicate for admissible characters, not including the control characters.
isAdmissibleChar :: Char -> Bool
...
-- Predicate for control characters that need to be escaped.
isControlChar :: Char -> Bool
...
-- The escape character.
escChar :: Char
...
pComponent :: Parser (Maybe Text)
pComponent = do
t <- MP.many (escaped <|> regular)
if null t then return Nothing else return $ Just (T.pack t)
where
regular = MP.satisfy isAdmissibleChar <|> fail "Inadmissible character"
escaped = do
_ <- MC.char escChar
MP.satisfy isControlChar -- only control characters may be escaped
Say, admissible characters are uppercase ASCII, escape is '\', and control is ':'.
Then, the following parses correctly: ABC\:D:EF to yield ABC:D.
However, parsing ABC&D, where & is inadmissible, does yield ABC whereas I would expect an error message instead.
Two questions:
Why does fail end parsing instead of failing the parser?
Is the above approach sensible to approach the problem, or is there a "proper", canonical way to parse such terminated strings that I am not aware of?
many has to allow its sub-parser to fail once without the whole parse
failing - for example many (char 'A') *> char 'B', while parsing
"AAAB", has to fail to parse the B to know it got to the end of the
As.
You might want manyTill which allows you to recognise the terminator
explicitly. Something like this:
MP.manyTill (escaped <|> regular) (MP.satisfy isControlChar)
"ABC&D" would give an error here assuming '&' isn't accepted by isControlChar.
Or if you want to parse more than one component you might keep your
existing definition of pComponent and use it with sepBy or similar, like:
MP.sepBy pComponent (MP.satisfy isControlChar)
If you also check for end-of-file after this, like:
MP.sepBy pComponent (MP.satisfy isControlChar) <* MP.eof
then "ABC&D" should give an error again, because the '&' will end the first component but will not be accepted as a separator.
What a parser object normally does is to extract from the input stream whatever subset it is supposed to accept. That's the usual rule.
Here, it seems you want the parser to accept strings that are followed by something specific. From your examples, it is either end of file (eof) or character ':'. So you might want to consider look ahead.
Environment and auxiliary functions:
import Data.Void (Void)
import qualified Data.Text as T
import qualified Text.Megaparsec as MP
import qualified Text.Megaparsec.Char as MC
type Parser = MP.Parsec Void T.Text
-- Predicate for admissible characters, not including the control characters.
isAdmissibleChar :: Char -> Bool
isAdmissibleChar ch = elem ch ['A' .. 'Z']
-- Predicate for control characters that need to be escaped.
isControlChar :: Char -> Bool
isControlChar ch = elem ch ":"
-- The escape character:
escChar :: Char
escChar = '\\'
Termination parser, to be used for look ahead:
termination :: Parser ()
termination = MP.eof MP.<|> do
_ <- MP.satisfy isControlChar
return ()
Modified pComponent parser:
pComponent :: Parser (Maybe T.Text)
pComponent = do
txt <- MP.many (escaped MP.<|> regular)
MP.lookAhead termination -- **CHANGE HERE**
if (null txt) then (return Nothing) else (return $ Just (T.pack txt))
where
regular = (MP.satisfy isAdmissibleChar) MP.<|> (fail "Inadmissible character")
escaped = do
_ <- MC.char escChar
MP.satisfy isControlChar -- only control characters may be escaped
Testing utility:
tryParse :: String -> IO ()
tryParse str = do
let res = MP.parse pComponent "(noname)" (T.pack str)
putStrLn $ (show res)
Let's try to rerun your examples:
$ ghci
λ>
λ> :load q67809465.hs
λ>
λ> str1 = "ABC\\:D:EF"
λ> putStrLn str1
ABC\:D:EF
λ>
λ> tryParse str1
Right (Just "ABC:D")
λ>
So that is successful, as desired.
λ>
λ> tryParse "ABC&D"
Left (ParseErrorBundle {bundleErrors = TrivialError 3 (Just (Tokens ('&' :| ""))) (fromList [EndOfInput]) :| [], bundlePosState = PosState {pstateInput = "ABC&D", pstateOffset = 0, pstateSourcePos = SourcePos {sourceName = "(noname)", sourceLine = Pos 1, sourceColumn = Pos 1}, pstateTabWidth = Pos 8, pstateLinePrefix = ""}})
λ>
So that fails, as desired.
Trying our 2 acceptable termination contexts:
λ> tryParse "ABC:&D"
Right (Just "ABC")
λ>
λ>
λ> tryParse "ABCDEF"
Right (Just "ABCDEF")
λ>
fail does not end parsing in general. It just continues with the next alternative. In this case it selects the empty list alternative introduced by the many combinator, so it stops parsing without an error message.
I think the best way to solve your problem is to specify that the input must end in a termination character, that means that it cannot "succeed" halfway like this. You can do that with the notFollowedBy or lookAhead combinators. Here is the relevant part of the megaparsec tutorial.
I'm trying to implement an analyzer via a monadic parser combination using FParsec. I also use an indentation module, but it is not important for the current problem.
So I'm trying to parse this branch of my little AST:
type Identifier = string
type Expression =
...
| Call of Identifier * Expression list
...
type Program = Program of Expression list
I have this implementation:
// Identifier parser
let private identifier =
many1Satisfy2L isLetter
(fun c -> isLetter c || isDigit c) "identifier"
// Monadic parser
let call = parse {
let! id = identifier
let! parameters = sepBy parameter spaces1
return Call(id, parameters)
}
and expression =
... // <|>
attempt call // <|>
...
parameter represents all acceptable expressions in a function call as a parameter:
// All possible parameter
let parameter =
attempt pint32 <|> // A number, for example.
attempt (identifier |>> fun callid -> Call(callid, [])) <|>
attempt (between (pstring "(") (pstring ")") call)
As you can see, there are two elements of the parser that use the "C/call". They correspond to this, in order and for example:
add x 1 // Call the function `add` and passing it another call (`x`) and the simple literal `1`
add (add 8 2) 10 // Call the function `add` and passing it another call (`add 8 2`) and the simple literal `10`
And of course, these elements can also be intertwined:
add (add x 1) 7
The problem, which I obviously can't solve otherwise I won't ask the question, is that the generated tree doesn't look like what is expected:
add x 1 gives:
Success: Program [Call ("add",[Call ("x",[]); Literal (Int 1)])]
In other words, the parser seems to identify the following x as the arguments of x.
However, the second way works. add (add 8 2) 10 gives:
Success: Program
[Call
("add",[Call ("add",[Literal (Int 8); Literal (Int 2)]); Literal (Int 10)])]
Could you put me on track?
To me it looks like the following line matches x:
attempt (identifier |>> fun callid -> Call(callid, [])) <|>
A single identifier is seen as a call.
It therefore doesn't suprise that you get: [Call ("add",[Call ("x",[]); Literal (Int 1)])
As you think this is wrong what is the expected results for you? I would have expected this to be an identifer dereference expression.
Also a tip, you seem to have opted for the OCaml style of invoking functions like so: f x y
Perhaps you should also go for the OCaml style that a function always takes a single argument and returns a single value.
add x 1 would then be parsed into something like: Apply (Apply (Identifier "add", Identifier "x"), Literal 1)
I'm trying to write a parser for a data Person (data Person). But I have to write it in just one line using <$> and <*> and I was trying a lot, but I'm getting really "overtaxed".
The parser type is as usual:
newtype Parser a = Parser (String -> [(a,String)])
And I have this function:
parse :: Parser a -> String -> Maybe a
that returns the first complete parse.
e.g.
if I have this easy function:
upper :: Parser Char
upper = satisfy isUpper
If I run parse upper "A" I get Just 'A'
I also have a funnier function like this:
name :: Parser String
name = (:) <$> (satisfy isUpper) <*> (many $ satisfy isAlpha)
which, as you can see, accepts all strings that are literal characters and begin with an upper Letter.
so:
*Main> parse name1 "hello"
Nothing
*Main> parse name1 "Hello"
Just "Hello"
Until now is everything fine, the only problem is that I have to do something like that for the class (data, type ?!) Person (data Person)
so, I have this:
data Person = Person String deriving (Eq, Show)
And then, in just one line, I have to write the parser for Person, but the name should satisfy the function name, it means, the name should be just a chain of literal characters, where the first one is upper case.
And it should work so:
> parse parserPerson "Chuck"
Just (Person "Chuck")
> parse parserPerson "chuck"
Nothing
where:
parserPerson :: Parser Person
parserPerson = ???
As you can see, bevor "Chuck" there is Person, so I've to use somehow *> to get it.
And that's it, just a line with <$>, <*> and *> that works that way.
I don't have a clue, and I'm getting crazy with this. Maybe anyone could help me.
EDIT
satisfy :: (Char -> Bool) -> Parser Char -- parse a desired character
satisfy p = Parser check
where
check (c:s) | p c = [(c,s)] -- successful
check _ = [ ] -- no parse
and many (as some) are functions from the Control.Applicative Control.Applicative
As tsorn said, the answer was really easy...
parserPerson :: Parser Person
parserPerson = Person <$> name1
and it works because the Functor Instacnce was defined.
instance Functor Parser where
fmap f (Parser p) = Parser $ \s -> map (\(a,b) -> (f a, b)) $ p s
I am trying to parse an int32 with FParsec but have an additional restriction that the number must be less than some maximum value. Is their a way to perform this without writing my own custom parser (as below) and/or is my custom parser (below) the appropriate way of achieving the requirements.
I ask because most of the built-in library functions seem to revolve around a char satisfying certain predicates and not any other type.
let pRow: Parser<int> =
let error = messageError ("int parsed larger than maxRows")
let mutable res = Reply(Error, error)
fun stream ->
let reply = pint32 stream
if reply.Status = Ok && reply.Result <= 1000000 then
res <- reply
res
UPDATE
Below is an attempt at a more fitting FParsec solution based on the direction given in the comment below:
let pRow2: Parser<int> =
pint32 >>= (fun x -> if x <= 1048576 then (preturn x) else fail "int parsed larger than maxRows")
Is this the correct way to do it?
You've done an excellent research and almost answered your own question.
Generally, there are two approaches:
Unconditionally parse out an int and let the further code to check it for validity;
Use a guard rule bound to the parser. In this case (>>=) is the right tool;
In order to make a good choice, ask yourself whether an integer that failed to pass the guard rule has to "give another chance" by triggering another parser?
Here's what I mean. Usually, in real-life projects, parsers are combined in some chains. If one parser fails, the following one is attempted. For example, in this question, some programming language is parsed, so it needs something like:
let pContent =
pLineComment <|> pOperator <|> pNumeral <|> pKeyword <|> pIdentifier
Theoretically, your DSL may need to differentiate a "small int value" from another type:
/// The resulting type, or DSL
type Output =
| SmallValue of int
| LargeValueAndString of int * string
| Comment of string
let pSmallValue =
pint32 >>= (fun x -> if x <= 1048576 then (preturn x) else fail "int parsed larger than maxRows")
|>> SmallValue
let pLargeValueAndString =
pint32 .>> ws .>>. (manyTill ws)
|>> LargeValueAndString
let pComment =
manyTill ws
|>> Comment
let pCombined =
[ pSmallValue; pLargeValueAndString; pComment]
|> List.map attempt // each parser is optional
|> choice // on each iteration, one of the parsers must succeed
|> many // a loop
Built this way, pCombined will return:
"42 ABC" gets parsed as [ SmallValue 42 ; Comment "ABC" ]
"1234567 ABC" gets parsed as [ LargeValueAndString(1234567, "ABC") ]
As we see, the guard rule impacts how the parsers are applied, so the guard rule has to be within the parsing process.
If, however, you don't need such complication (e.g., an int is parsed unconditionally), your first snippet is just fine.
I am writing a custom read function for one of the data types in my module. For eg, when I do read "(1 + 1)" :: Data, I want it to return Plus 1 1. My data declaration is data Data = Plus Int Int. Thanks
This sounds like something better suited to a parser; Parsec is a powerful Haskell parser combinator library, which I would recommend.
I'd like to second the notion of using a parser. However, if you absolutely have to use a pattern-matching, go like this:
import Data.List
data Expr = Plus Int Int | Minus Int Int deriving Show
test = [ myRead "(1 + 1)", myRead "(2-1)" ]
myRead = match . lexer
where
match ["(",a,"+",b,")"] = Plus (read a) (read b)
match ["(",a,"-",b,")"] = Minus (read a) (read b)
match garbage = error $ "Cannot parse " ++ show garbage
lexer = unfoldr next_lexeme
where
next_lexeme "" = Nothing
next_lexeme str = Just $ head $ lex str
You could use GHC's ReadP.