+
+Developing a parser can be a challenge, especially if you don't
+understand the algorithm (@pxref{Algorithm, ,The Bison Parser
+Algorithm}). Even so, sometimes a detailed description of the automaton
+can help (@pxref{Understanding, , Understanding Your Parser}), or
+tracing the execution of the parser can give some insight on why it
+behaves improperly (@pxref{Tracing, , Tracing Your Parser}).
+
+@menu
+* Understanding:: Understanding the structure of your parser.
+* Tracing:: Tracing the execution of your parser.
+@end menu
+
+@node Understanding
+@section Understanding Your Parser
+
+As documented elsewhere (@pxref{Algorithm, ,The Bison Parser Algorithm})
+Bison parsers are @dfn{shift/reduce automata}. In some cases (much more
+frequent than one would hope), looking at this automaton is required to
+tune or simply fix a parser. Bison provides two different
+representation of it, either textually or graphically (as a @acronym{VCG}
+file).
+
+The textual file is generated when the options @option{--report} or
+@option{--verbose} are specified, see @xref{Invocation, , Invoking
+Bison}. Its name is made by removing @samp{.tab.c} or @samp{.c} from
+the parser output file name, and adding @samp{.output} instead.
+Therefore, if the input file is @file{foo.y}, then the parser file is
+called @file{foo.tab.c} by default. As a consequence, the verbose
+output file is called @file{foo.output}.
+
+The following grammar file, @file{calc.y}, will be used in the sequel:
+
+@example
+%token NUM STR
+%left '+' '-'
+%left '*'
+%%
+exp: exp '+' exp
+ | exp '-' exp
+ | exp '*' exp
+ | exp '/' exp
+ | NUM
+ ;
+useless: STR;
+%%
+@end example
+
+@command{bison} reports:
+
+@example
+calc.y: warning: 1 useless nonterminal and 1 useless rule
+calc.y:11.1-7: warning: useless nonterminal: useless
+calc.y:11.10-12: warning: useless rule: useless: STR
+calc.y: conflicts: 7 shift/reduce
+@end example
+
+When given @option{--report=state}, in addition to @file{calc.tab.c}, it
+creates a file @file{calc.output} with contents detailed below. The
+order of the output and the exact presentation might vary, but the
+interpretation is the same.
+
+The first section includes details on conflicts that were solved thanks
+to precedence and/or associativity:
+
+@example
+Conflict in state 8 between rule 2 and token '+' resolved as reduce.
+Conflict in state 8 between rule 2 and token '-' resolved as reduce.
+Conflict in state 8 between rule 2 and token '*' resolved as shift.
+@exdent @dots{}
+@end example
+
+@noindent
+The next section lists states that still have conflicts.
+
+@example
+State 8 conflicts: 1 shift/reduce
+State 9 conflicts: 1 shift/reduce
+State 10 conflicts: 1 shift/reduce
+State 11 conflicts: 4 shift/reduce
+@end example
+
+@noindent
+@cindex token, useless
+@cindex useless token
+@cindex nonterminal, useless
+@cindex useless nonterminal
+@cindex rule, useless
+@cindex useless rule
+The next section reports useless tokens, nonterminal and rules. Useless
+nonterminals and rules are removed in order to produce a smaller parser,
+but useless tokens are preserved, since they might be used by the
+scanner (note the difference between ``useless'' and ``not used''
+below):
+
+@example
+Useless nonterminals:
+ useless
+
+Terminals which are not used:
+ STR
+
+Useless rules:
+#6 useless: STR;
+@end example
+
+@noindent
+The next section reproduces the exact grammar that Bison used:
+
+@example
+Grammar
+
+ Number, Line, Rule
+ 0 5 $accept -> exp $end
+ 1 5 exp -> exp '+' exp
+ 2 6 exp -> exp '-' exp
+ 3 7 exp -> exp '*' exp
+ 4 8 exp -> exp '/' exp
+ 5 9 exp -> NUM
+@end example
+
+@noindent
+and reports the uses of the symbols:
+
+@example
+Terminals, with rules where they appear
+
+$end (0) 0
+'*' (42) 3
+'+' (43) 1
+'-' (45) 2
+'/' (47) 4
+error (256)
+NUM (258) 5
+
+Nonterminals, with rules where they appear
+
+$accept (8)
+ on left: 0
+exp (9)
+ on left: 1 2 3 4 5, on right: 0 1 2 3 4
+@end example
+
+@noindent
+@cindex item
+@cindex pointed rule
+@cindex rule, pointed
+Bison then proceeds onto the automaton itself, describing each state
+with it set of @dfn{items}, also known as @dfn{pointed rules}. Each
+item is a production rule together with a point (marked by @samp{.})
+that the input cursor.
+
+@example
+state 0
+
+ $accept -> . exp $ (rule 0)
+
+ NUM shift, and go to state 1
+
+ exp go to state 2
+@end example
+
+This reads as follows: ``state 0 corresponds to being at the very
+beginning of the parsing, in the initial rule, right before the start
+symbol (here, @code{exp}). When the parser returns to this state right
+after having reduced a rule that produced an @code{exp}, the control
+flow jumps to state 2. If there is no such transition on a nonterminal
+symbol, and the lookahead is a @code{NUM}, then this token is shifted on
+the parse stack, and the control flow jumps to state 1. Any other
+lookahead triggers a syntax error.''
+
+@cindex core, item set
+@cindex item set core
+@cindex kernel, item set
+@cindex item set core
+Even though the only active rule in state 0 seems to be rule 0, the
+report lists @code{NUM} as a lookahead symbol because @code{NUM} can be
+at the beginning of any rule deriving an @code{exp}. By default Bison
+reports the so-called @dfn{core} or @dfn{kernel} of the item set, but if
+you want to see more detail you can invoke @command{bison} with
+@option{--report=itemset} to list all the items, include those that can
+be derived:
+
+@example
+state 0
+
+ $accept -> . exp $ (rule 0)
+ exp -> . exp '+' exp (rule 1)
+ exp -> . exp '-' exp (rule 2)
+ exp -> . exp '*' exp (rule 3)
+ exp -> . exp '/' exp (rule 4)
+ exp -> . NUM (rule 5)
+
+ NUM shift, and go to state 1
+
+ exp go to state 2
+@end example
+
+@noindent
+In the state 1...
+
+@example
+state 1
+
+ exp -> NUM . (rule 5)
+
+ $default reduce using rule 5 (exp)
+@end example
+
+@noindent
+the rule 5, @samp{exp: NUM;}, is completed. Whatever the lookahead
+(@samp{$default}), the parser will reduce it. If it was coming from
+state 0, then, after this reduction it will return to state 0, and will
+jump to state 2 (@samp{exp: go to state 2}).
+
+@example
+state 2
+
+ $accept -> exp . $ (rule 0)
+ exp -> exp . '+' exp (rule 1)
+ exp -> exp . '-' exp (rule 2)
+ exp -> exp . '*' exp (rule 3)
+ exp -> exp . '/' exp (rule 4)
+
+ $ shift, and go to state 3
+ '+' shift, and go to state 4
+ '-' shift, and go to state 5
+ '*' shift, and go to state 6
+ '/' shift, and go to state 7
+@end example
+
+@noindent
+In state 2, the automaton can only shift a symbol. For instance,
+because of the item @samp{exp -> exp . '+' exp}, if the lookahead if
+@samp{+}, it will be shifted on the parse stack, and the automaton
+control will jump to state 4, corresponding to the item @samp{exp -> exp
+'+' . exp}. Since there is no default action, any other token than
+those listed above will trigger a syntax error.
+
+The state 3 is named the @dfn{final state}, or the @dfn{accepting
+state}:
+
+@example
+state 3
+
+ $accept -> exp $ . (rule 0)
+
+ $default accept
+@end example
+
+@noindent
+the initial rule is completed (the start symbol and the end
+of input were read), the parsing exits successfully.
+
+The interpretation of states 4 to 7 is straightforward, and is left to
+the reader.
+
+@example
+state 4
+
+ exp -> exp '+' . exp (rule 1)
+
+ NUM shift, and go to state 1
+
+ exp go to state 8
+
+state 5
+
+ exp -> exp '-' . exp (rule 2)
+
+ NUM shift, and go to state 1
+
+ exp go to state 9
+
+state 6
+
+ exp -> exp '*' . exp (rule 3)
+
+ NUM shift, and go to state 1
+
+ exp go to state 10
+
+state 7
+
+ exp -> exp '/' . exp (rule 4)
+
+ NUM shift, and go to state 1
+
+ exp go to state 11
+@end example
+
+As was announced in beginning of the report, @samp{State 8 conflicts:
+1 shift/reduce}:
+
+@example
+state 8
+
+ exp -> exp . '+' exp (rule 1)
+ exp -> exp '+' exp . (rule 1)
+ exp -> exp . '-' exp (rule 2)
+ exp -> exp . '*' exp (rule 3)
+ exp -> exp . '/' exp (rule 4)
+
+ '*' shift, and go to state 6
+ '/' shift, and go to state 7
+
+ '/' [reduce using rule 1 (exp)]
+ $default reduce using rule 1 (exp)
+@end example
+
+Indeed, there are two actions associated to the lookahead @samp{/}:
+either shifting (and going to state 7), or reducing rule 1. The
+conflict means that either the grammar is ambiguous, or the parser lacks
+information to make the right decision. Indeed the grammar is
+ambiguous, as, since we did not specify the precedence of @samp{/}, the
+sentence @samp{NUM + NUM / NUM} can be parsed as @samp{NUM + (NUM /
+NUM)}, which corresponds to shifting @samp{/}, or as @samp{(NUM + NUM) /
+NUM}, which corresponds to reducing rule 1.
+
+Because in @acronym{LALR}(1) parsing a single decision can be made, Bison
+arbitrarily chose to disable the reduction, see @ref{Shift/Reduce, ,
+Shift/Reduce Conflicts}. Discarded actions are reported in between
+square brackets.
+
+Note that all the previous states had a single possible action: either
+shifting the next token and going to the corresponding state, or
+reducing a single rule. In the other cases, i.e., when shifting
+@emph{and} reducing is possible or when @emph{several} reductions are
+possible, the lookahead is required to select the action. State 8 is
+one such state: if the lookahead is @samp{*} or @samp{/} then the action
+is shifting, otherwise the action is reducing rule 1. In other words,
+the first two items, corresponding to rule 1, are not eligible when the
+lookahead is @samp{*}, since we specified that @samp{*} has higher
+precedence that @samp{+}. More generally, some items are eligible only
+with some set of possible lookaheads. When run with
+@option{--report=lookahead}, Bison specifies these lookaheads:
+
+@example
+state 8
+
+ exp -> exp . '+' exp [$, '+', '-', '/'] (rule 1)
+ exp -> exp '+' exp . [$, '+', '-', '/'] (rule 1)
+ exp -> exp . '-' exp (rule 2)
+ exp -> exp . '*' exp (rule 3)
+ exp -> exp . '/' exp (rule 4)
+
+ '*' shift, and go to state 6
+ '/' shift, and go to state 7
+
+ '/' [reduce using rule 1 (exp)]
+ $default reduce using rule 1 (exp)
+@end example
+
+The remaining states are similar:
+
+@example
+state 9
+
+ exp -> exp . '+' exp (rule 1)
+ exp -> exp . '-' exp (rule 2)
+ exp -> exp '-' exp . (rule 2)
+ exp -> exp . '*' exp (rule 3)
+ exp -> exp . '/' exp (rule 4)
+
+ '*' shift, and go to state 6
+ '/' shift, and go to state 7
+
+ '/' [reduce using rule 2 (exp)]
+ $default reduce using rule 2 (exp)
+
+state 10
+
+ exp -> exp . '+' exp (rule 1)
+ exp -> exp . '-' exp (rule 2)
+ exp -> exp . '*' exp (rule 3)
+ exp -> exp '*' exp . (rule 3)
+ exp -> exp . '/' exp (rule 4)
+
+ '/' shift, and go to state 7
+
+ '/' [reduce using rule 3 (exp)]
+ $default reduce using rule 3 (exp)
+
+state 11
+
+ exp -> exp . '+' exp (rule 1)
+ exp -> exp . '-' exp (rule 2)
+ exp -> exp . '*' exp (rule 3)
+ exp -> exp . '/' exp (rule 4)
+ exp -> exp '/' exp . (rule 4)
+
+ '+' shift, and go to state 4
+ '-' shift, and go to state 5
+ '*' shift, and go to state 6
+ '/' shift, and go to state 7
+
+ '+' [reduce using rule 4 (exp)]
+ '-' [reduce using rule 4 (exp)]
+ '*' [reduce using rule 4 (exp)]
+ '/' [reduce using rule 4 (exp)]
+ $default reduce using rule 4 (exp)
+@end example
+
+@noindent
+Observe that state 11 contains conflicts due to the lack of precedence
+of @samp{/} wrt @samp{+}, @samp{-}, and @samp{*}, but also because the
+associativity of @samp{/} is not specified.
+
+
+@node Tracing
+@section Tracing Your Parser
projects / bison.git / blobdiff