+@node How Can I Reset @code{yyparse}
+@section How Can I Reset @code{yyparse}
+
+The following phenomenon has several symptoms, resulting in the
+following typical questions:
+
+@display
+I invoke @code{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 @code{yyparse}?
+@end display
+
+@noindent
+or
+
+@display
+My parser includes support for an @samp{#include}-like feature, in
+which case I run @code{yyparse} from @code{yyparse}. This fails
+although I did specify I needed a @code{%pure-parser}.
+@end display
+
+These problems typically come not from Bison itself, but from
+Lex-generated scanners. Because these scanners use large buffers for
+speed, they might not notice a change of input file. As a
+demonstration, consider the following source file,
+@file{first-line.l}:
+
+@verbatim
+%{
+#include <stdio.h>
+#include <stdlib.h>
+%}
+%%
+.*\n ECHO; return 1;
+%%
+int
+yyparse (char const *file)
+{
+ yyin = fopen (file, "r");
+ if (!yyin)
+ exit (2);
+ /* One token only. */
+ yylex ();
+ if (fclose (yyin) != 0)
+ exit (3);
+ return 0;
+}
+
+int
+main (void)
+{
+ yyparse ("input");
+ yyparse ("input");
+ return 0;
+}
+@end verbatim
+
+@noindent
+If the file @file{input} contains
+
+@verbatim
+input:1: Hello,
+input:2: World!
+@end verbatim
+
+@noindent
+then instead of getting the first line twice, you get:
+
+@example
+$ @kbd{flex -ofirst-line.c first-line.l}
+$ @kbd{gcc -ofirst-line first-line.c -ll}
+$ @kbd{./first-line}
+input:1: Hello,
+input:2: World!
+@end example
+
+Therefore, whenever you change @code{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
+@samp{YY_FLUSH_BUFFER} after each change to @code{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 @samp{yy_switch_to_buffer} that manipulate multiple
+input buffers.
+
+@node Strings are Destroyed
+@section Strings are Destroyed
+
+@display
+My parser seems to destroy old strings, or maybe it loses track of
+them. Instead of reporting @samp{"foo", "bar"}, it reports
+@samp{"bar", "bar"}, or even @samp{"foo\nbar", "bar"}.
+@end display
+
+This error is probably the single most frequent ``bug report'' sent to
+Bison lists, but is only concerned with a misunderstanding of the role
+of scanner. Consider the following Lex code:
+
+@verbatim
+%{
+#include <stdio.h>
+char *yylval = NULL;
+%}
+%%
+.* yylval = yytext; return 1;
+\n /* IGNORE */
+%%
+int
+main ()
+{
+ /* Similar to using $1, $2 in a Bison action. */
+ char *fst = (yylex (), yylval);
+ char *snd = (yylex (), yylval);
+ printf ("\"%s\", \"%s\"\n", fst, snd);
+ return 0;
+}
+@end verbatim
+
+If you compile and run this code, you get:
+
+@example
+$ @kbd{flex -osplit-lines.c split-lines.l}
+$ @kbd{gcc -osplit-lines split-lines.c -ll}
+$ @kbd{printf 'one\ntwo\n' | ./split-lines}
+"one
+two", "two"
+@end example
+
+@noindent
+this is because @code{yytext} is a buffer provided for @emph{reading}
+in the action, but if you want to keep it, you have to duplicate it
+(e.g., using @code{strdup}). Note that the output may depend on how
+your implementation of Lex handles @code{yytext}. For instance, when
+given the Lex compatibility option @option{-l} (which triggers the
+option @samp{%array}) Flex generates a different behavior:
+
+@example
+$ @kbd{flex -l -osplit-lines.c split-lines.l}
+$ @kbd{gcc -osplit-lines split-lines.c -ll}
+$ @kbd{printf 'one\ntwo\n' | ./split-lines}
+"two", "two"
+@end example
+
+
+@node C++ Parsers
+@section C++ Parsers
+
+@display
+How can I generate parsers in C++?
+@end display
+
+We are working on a C++ output for Bison, but unfortunately, for lack
+of time, the skeleton is not finished. It is functional, but in
+numerous respects, it will require additional work which @emph{might}
+break backward compatibility. Since the skeleton for C++ is not
+documented, we do not consider ourselves bound to this interface,
+nevertheless, as much as possible we will try to keep compatibility.
+
+Another possibility is to use the regular C parsers, and to compile
+them with a C++ compiler. This works properly, provided that you bear
+some simple C++ rules in mind, such as not including ``real classes''
+(i.e., structure with constructors) in unions. Therefore, in the
+@code{%union}, use pointers to classes, or better yet, a single
+pointer type to the root of your lexical/syntactic hierarchy.
+
+
+@node Implementing Loops
+@section Implementing Loops
+
+@display
+My simple calculator supports variables, assignments, and functions,
+but how can I implement loops?
+@end display
+
+Although very pedagogical, the examples included in the document blur
+the distinction to make between the parser---whose job is to recover
+the structure of a text and to transmit it to subsequent modules of
+the program---and the processing (such as the execution) of this
+structure. This works well with so called straight line programs,
+i.e., precisely those that have a straightforward execution model:
+execute simple instructions one after the others.
+
+@cindex abstract syntax tree
+@cindex @acronym{AST}
+If you want a richer model, you will probably need to use the parser
+to construct a tree that does represent the structure it has
+recovered; this tree is usually called the @dfn{abstract syntax tree},
+or @dfn{@acronym{AST}} for short. Then, walking through this tree,
+traversing it in various ways, will enable treatments such as its
+execution or its translation, which will result in an interpreter or a
+compiler.
+
+This topic is way beyond the scope of this manual, and the reader is
+invited to consult the dedicated literature.
+
+
+
projects / bison.git / blobdiff