Search Results

Search found 33 results on 2 pages for 'parsec'.

Page 1/2 | 1 2  | Next Page >

  • parsec-3.1.0 with custom token datatype

    - by Tener
    parsec-3.1.0 ( http://hackage.haskell.org/package/parsec-3.1.0 ) works with any token type. However there are combinators like Text.Parsec.Char.satisfy that are only defined for Char datatype. There doesn't seem to be any more general counterpart available. Should I define my own versions or did I miss something? Perhaps there are different parser libraries in Haskell that allows: custom token types custom parser state (I need to parse stateful format - Wavefront OBJ)

    Read the article

  • Parsec: backtracking not working

    - by Nathan Sanders
    I am trying to parse F# type syntax. I started writing an [F]Parsec grammar and ran into problems, so I simplified the grammar down to this: type ::= identifier | type -> type identifier ::= [A-Za-z0-9.`]+ After running into problems with FParsec, I switched to Parsec, since I have a full chapter of a book dedicated to explaining it. My code for this grammar is typeP = choice [identP, arrowP] identP = do id <- many1 (digit <|> letter <|> char '.' <|> char '`') -- more complicated code here later return id arrowP = do domain <- typeP string "->" range <- typeP return $ "("++domain++" -> "++range++")" run = parse (do t <- typeP eof return t) "F# type syntax" The problem is that Parsec doesn't backtrack by default, so > run "int" Right "int" -- works! > run "int->int" Left "F# type syntax" unexpected "-" expecting digit, letter, ".", "`" or end of input -- doesn't work! The first thing I tried was to reorder typeP: typeP = choice [arrowP, identP] But this just stack overflows because the grammar is left-recursive--typeP never gets to trying identP because it keeps trying arrowP over and over. Next I tried try in various places, for example: typeP = choice [try identP, arrowP] But nothing I do seems to change the basic behaviours of (1) stack overflow or (2) non-recognition of "-" following an identifier. My mistake is probably obvious to anybody who has successfully written a Parsec grammar. Can somebody point it out?

    Read the article

  • Parsing Indentation-based syntaxes in Haskell's Parsec

    - by pavpanchekha
    I'm trying to parse an indentation-based language (think Python, Haskell itself, Boo, YAML) in Haskell using Parsec. I've seen the IndentParser library, and it looks like it's the perfect match, but what I can't figure out is how to make my TokenParser into an indentation parser. Here's the code I have so far: import qualified Text.ParserCombinators.Parsec.Token as T import qualified Text.ParserCombinators.Parsec.IndentParser.Token as IT lexer = T.makeTokenParser mylangDef ident = IT.identifier lexer This throws the error: parser2.hs:29:28: Couldn't match expected type `IT.TokenParser st' against inferred type `T.GenTokenParser s u m' In the first argument of `IT.identifier', namely `lexer' In the expression: IT.identifier lexer In the definition of `ident': ident = IT.identifier lexer What am I doing wrong? How should I create an IT.TokenParser? Or is IndentParser broken and to be avoided?

    Read the article

  • many1 no longer works with Parsec 3.x

    - by Zak
    After updating to Parsec 3.1 from 2.x, code using many1, such as word = many1 letter fails with No instance for (Stream s m Char) arising from a use of `letter' I found a mailing list post claiming that adding {-#LANGUAGE NoMonomorphismRestriction #-} to the top of the source file would solve the problem, but it did not.

    Read the article

  • Haskell Parsec Numeration

    - by Martin
    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: <h11 First type A\n</h1 <h21.1 First type B\n</h2 <h12 Second type A\n</h2 <h22.1 First type B\n</h2 <h22.2 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!

    Read the article

  • Custom whiteSpace using Haskell Parsec

    - by fryguybob
    I would like to use Parsec's makeTokenParser to build my parser, but I want to use my own definition of whiteSpace. Doing the following replaces whiteSpace with my definition, but all the lexeme parsers still use the old definition (e.g. P.identifier lexer will use the old whiteSpace). ... lexer :: P.TokenParser () lexer = l { P.whiteSpace = myWhiteSpace } where l = P.makeTokenParser myLanguageDef ... Looking at the code for makeTokenParser I think I understand why it works this way. I want to know if there are any workarounds to avoid completely duplicating the code for makeTokenParser?

    Read the article

  • Haskell Parse Paragraph and em element with Parsec

    - by Martin
    I'm using Text.ParserCombinators.Parsec and Text.XHtml to parse an input like this: this is the beginning of the paragraph --this is an emphasized text-- and this is the end\n And my output should be: <p>this is the beginning of the paragraph <em>this is an emphasized text</em> and this is the end\n</p> This code parses and returns an emphasized element em = do{ ;count 2 (char '-') ; ;s <- manyTill anyChar (count 2 (char '-')) ;return (emphasize << s) } But I don't know how to get the paragraphs with emphasized items Any ideas? Thanks!!

    Read the article

  • Parsec Haskell Lists

    - by Martin
    I'm using Text.ParserCombinators.Parsec and Text.XHtml to parse an input and get a HTML output. If my input is: * First item, First level ** First item, Second level ** Second item, Second level * Second item, First level My output should be: <ul><li>First item, First level <ul><li>First item, Second level </li><li>Second item, Second level </li></ul></li><li>Second item, First level</li></ul> I wrote this, but obviously does not work recursively list= do{ s <- many1 item;return (olist << s) } item= do{ (count 1 (char '*')) ;s <- manyTill anyChar newline ;return ( li << s) } Any ideas? the recursion can be more than two levels Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Haskell - Parsec Parsing <p> element

    - by Martin
    I'm using Text.ParserCombinators.Parsec and Text.XHtml to parse an input like this: This is the first paragraph example\n with two lines\n \n And this is the second paragraph\n And my output should be: <p>This is the first paragraph example\n with two lines\n</p> <p>And this is the second paragraph\n</p> I defined: line= do{ ;t<-manyTill (anyChar) newline ;return t } paragraph = do{ t<-many1 (line) ;return ( p << t ) } But it returns: <p>This is the first paragraph example\n with two lines\n\n And this is the second paragraph\n</p> What is wrong? Any ideas? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Haskell parsec parsing a string of items

    - by Chris
    I have a list that I need to parse where the all but the last element needs to be parsed by one parser, and the last element needs to be parsed by another parser. a = "p1 p1b ... p2" or a = "p2" Originally I tried parser = do parse1 <- many parser1 parse2 <- parser2 return AParse parse1 parse2 The problem is that parse1 can consume a parse2 input. So parse1 always consumes the entire list, and leave parse2 with nothing. Is there a way to say to apply parse1 to everything besides the last element in a string, and then apply parse2?

    Read the article

  • Can Haskell's Parsec library be used to implement a recursive descent parser with backup?

    - by Thor Thurn
    I've been considering using Haskell's Parsec parsing library to parse a subset of Java as a recursive descent parser as an alternative to more traditional parser-generator solutions like Happy. Parsec seems very easy to use, and parse speed is definitely not a factor for me. I'm wondering, though, if it's possible to implement "backup" with Parsec, a technique which finds the correct production to use by trying each one in turn. For a simple example, consider the very start of the JLS Java grammar: Literal: IntegerLiteral FloatingPointLiteral I'd like a way to not have to figure out how I should order these two rules to get the parse to succeed. As it stands, a naive implementation like this: literal = do { x <- try (do { v <- integer; return (IntLiteral v)}) <|> (do { v <- float; return (FPLiteral v)}); return(Literal x) } Will not work... inputs like "15.2" will cause the integer parser to succeed first, and then the whole thing will choke on the "." symbol. In this case, of course, it's obvious that you can solve the problem by re-ordering the two productions. In the general case, though, finding things like this is going to be a nightmare, and it's very likely that I'll miss some cases. Ideally, I'd like a way to have Parsec figure out stuff like this for me. Is this possible, or am I simply trying to do too much with the library? The Parsec documentation claims that it can "parse context-sensitive, infinite look-ahead grammars", so it seems like something like I should be able to do something here.

    Read the article

  • How do Scala parser combinators compare to Haskell's Parsec?

    - by artif
    I have read that Haskell parser combinators (in Parsec) can parse context sensitive grammars. Is this also true for Scala parser combinators? If so, is this what the "into" (aka "") function is for? What are some strengths/weaknesses of Scala's implementation of parser combinators, vs Haskell's? Do they accept the same class of grammars? Is it easier to generate error messages or do other miscellaneous useful things with one or the other? How does packrat parsing (introduced in Scala 2.8) fit into this picture? Is there a webpage or some other resource that shows how different operators/functions/DSL-sugar from one language's implementation maps onto the other's?

    Read the article

  • Using Haskell's Parsec to parse binary files?

    - by me2
    Parsec is designed to parse textual information, but it occurs to me that Parsec could also be suitable to do binary file format parsing for complex formats that involve conditional segments, out-of-order segments, etc. Is there an ability to do this or a similar, alternative package that does this? If not, what is the best way in Haskell to parse binary file formats?

    Read the article

  • Haskell Parse Paragraph and em element with Parsec

    - by Tincho
    I'm using Text.ParserCombinators.Parsec and Text.XHtml to parse an input like this: this is the beginning of the paragraph --this is an emphasized text-- and this is the end\n And my output should be: <p>this is the beginning of the paragraph <em>this is an emphasized text</em> and this is the end\n</p> This code parses and returns an emphasized element em = do{ ;count 2 (char '-') ; ;s <- manyTill anyChar (count 2 (char '-')) ;return (emphasize << s) } But I don't know how to get the paragraphs with emphasized items Any ideas? Thanks!!

    Read the article

  • Parsec Haskell to HTML

    - by Martin
    I'm using Text.ParserCombinators.Parsec and Text.XHtml to parse an input like this: hello 123 --this is an emphasized text-- bye\n And my output should be: <p>hello 123 <em>this is an emphasized text</em> bye\n</p> Any ideas? Thanks!!

    Read the article

  • Can parser combinators be made efficient?

    - by Jon Harrop
    Around 6 years ago, I benchmarked my own parser combinators in OCaml and found that they were ~5× slower than the parser generators on offer at the time. I recently revisited this subject and benchmarked Haskell's Parsec vs a simple hand-rolled precedence climbing parser written in F# and was surprised to find the F# to be 25× faster than the Haskell. Here's the Haskell code I used to read a large mathematical expression from file, parse and evaluate it: import Control.Applicative import Text.Parsec hiding ((<|>)) expr = chainl1 term ((+) <$ char '+' <|> (-) <$ char '-') term = chainl1 fact ((*) <$ char '*' <|> div <$ char '/') fact = read <$> many1 digit <|> char '(' *> expr <* char ')' eval :: String -> Int eval = either (error . show) id . parse expr "" . filter (/= ' ') main :: IO () main = do file <- readFile "expr" putStr $ show $ eval file putStr "\n" and here's my self-contained precedence climbing parser in F#: let rec (|Expr|) (P(f, xs)) = Expr(loop (' ', f, xs)) and loop = function | ' ' as oop, f, ('+' | '-' as op)::P(g, xs) | (' ' | '+' | '-' as oop), f, ('*' | '/' as op)::P(g, xs) -> let h, xs = loop (op, g, xs) let op = match op with | '+' -> (+) | '-' -> (-) | '*' -> (*) | '/' -> (/) loop (oop, op f h, xs) | _, f, xs -> f, xs and (|P|) = function | '('::Expr(f, ')'::xs) -> P(f, xs) | c::xs when '0' <= c && c <= '9' -> P(int(string c), xs) My impression is that even state-of-the-art parser combinators waste a lot of time back tracking. Is that correct? If so, is it possible to write parser combinators that generate state machines to obtain competitive performance or is it necessary to use code generation?

    Read the article

  • Can parser combination be made efficient?

    - by Jon Harrop
    Around 6 years ago, I benchmarked my own parser combinators in OCaml and found that they were ~5× slower than the parser generators on offer at the time. I recently revisited this subject and benchmarked Haskell's Parsec vs a simple hand-rolled precedence climbing parser written in F# and was surprised to find the F# to be 25× faster than the Haskell. Here's the Haskell code I used to read a large mathematical expression from file, parse and evaluate it: import Control.Applicative import Text.Parsec hiding ((<|>)) expr = chainl1 term ((+) <$ char '+' <|> (-) <$ char '-') term = chainl1 fact ((*) <$ char '*' <|> div <$ char '/') fact = read <$> many1 digit <|> char '(' *> expr <* char ')' eval :: String -> Int eval = either (error . show) id . parse expr "" . filter (/= ' ') main :: IO () main = do file <- readFile "expr" putStr $ show $ eval file putStr "\n" and here's my self-contained precedence climbing parser in F#: let rec (|Expr|) (P(f, xs)) = Expr(loop (' ', f, xs)) and shift oop f op (P(g, xs)) = let h, xs = loop (op, g, xs) loop (oop, f h, xs) and loop = function | ' ' as oop, f, ('+' | '-' as op)::P(g, xs) | (' ' | '+' | '-' as oop), f, ('*' | '/' as op)::P(g, xs) | oop, f, ('^' as op)::P(g, xs) -> let h, xs = loop (op, g, xs) let op = match op with | '+' -> (+) | '-' -> (-) | '*' -> (*) | '/' -> (/) | '^' -> pown loop (oop, op f h, xs) | _, f, xs -> f, xs and (|P|) = function | '-'::P(f, xs) -> let f, xs = loop ('~', f, xs) P(-f, xs) | '('::Expr(f, ')'::xs) -> P(f, xs) | c::xs when '0' <= c && c <= '9' -> P(int(string c), xs) My impression is that even state-of-the-art parser combinators waste a lot of time back tracking. Is that correct? If so, is it possible to write parser combinators that generate state machines to obtain competitive performance or is it necessary to use code generation?

    Read the article

  • Generalized Bottom up Parser Combinators in Haskell

    - by Panini Sai
    I am wondered why there is no generalized parser combinators for Bottom-up parsing in Haskell like a Parsec combinators for top down parsing. ( I could find some research work went during 2004 but nothing after https://haskell-functional-parsing.googlecode.com/files/Ljunglof-2002a.pdf http://www.di.ubi.pt/~jpf/Site/Publications_files/technicalReport.pdf ) Is there any specific reason for not achieving it?

    Read the article

  • What is this algorithm for converting strings into numbers called?

    - by CodexArcanum
    I've been doing some work in Parsec recently, and for my toy language I wanted multi-based fractional numbers to be expressible. After digging around in Parsec's source a bit, I found their implementation of a floating-point number parser, and copied it to make the needed modifications. So I understand what this code does, and vaguely why (I haven't worked out the math fully yet, but I think I get the gist). But where did it come from? This seems like a pretty clever way to turn strings into floats and ints, is there a name for this algorithm? Or is it just something basic that's a hole in my knowledge? Did the folks behind Parsec devise it? Here's the code, first for integers: number' :: Integer -> Parser Integer number' base = do { digits <- many1 ( oneOf ( sigilRange base )) ; let n = foldl (\x d -> base * x + toInteger (convertDigit base d)) 0 digits ; seq n (return n) } So the basic idea here is that digits contains the string representing the whole number part, ie "192". The foldl converts each digit individually into a number, then adds that to the running total multiplied by the base, which means that by the end each digit has been multiplied by the correct factor (in aggregate) to position it. The fractional part is even more interesting: fraction' :: Integer -> Parser Double fraction' base = do { digits <- many1 ( oneOf ( sigilRange base )) ; let base' = fromIntegral base ; let f = foldr (\d x -> (x + fromIntegral (convertDigit base d))/base') 0.0 digits ; seq f (return f) Same general idea, but now a foldr and using repeated division. I don't quite understand why you add first and then divide for the fraction, but multiply first then add for the whole. I know it works, just haven't sorted out why. Anyway, I feel dumb not working it out myself, it's very simple and clever looking at it. Is there a name for this algorithm? Maybe the imperative version using a loop would be more familiar?

    Read the article

  • Haskell: Best tools to validate textual input?

    - by Ana
    In Haskell, there are a few different options to "parsing text". I know of Alex & Happy, Parsec and Attoparsec. Probably some others. I'd like to put together a library where the user can input pieces of a URL (scheme e.g. HTTP, hostname, username, port, path, query, etc.) I'd like to validate the pieces according to the ABNF specified in RFC 3986. In other words, I'd like to put together a set of functions such as: validateScheme :: String -> Bool validateUsername :: String -> Bool validatePassword :: String -> Bool validateAuthority :: String -> Bool validatePath :: String -> Bool validateQuery :: String -> Bool What is the most appropriate tool to use to write these functions? Alex's regexps is very concise, but it's a tokenizer and doesn't straightforwardly allow you to parse using specific rules, so it's not quite what I'm looking for, but perhaps it can be wrangled into doing this easily. I've written Parsec code that does some of the above, but it looks very different from the original ABNF and unnecessarily long. So, there must be an easier and/or more appropriate way. Recommendations?

    Read the article

  • Threading extra state through a parser in Scala

    - by Travis Brown
    I'll give you the tl;dr up front I'm trying to use the state monad transformer in Scalaz 7 to thread extra state through a parser, and I'm having trouble doing anything useful without writing a lot of t m a -> t m b versions of m a -> m b methods. An example parsing problem Suppose I have a string containing nested parentheses with digits inside them: val input = "((617)((0)(32)))" I also have a stream of fresh variable names (characters, in this case): val names = Stream('a' to 'z': _*) I want to pull a name off the top of the stream and assign it to each parenthetical expression as I parse it, and then map that name to a string representing the contents of the parentheses, with the nested parenthetical expressions (if any) replaced by their names. To make this more concrete, here's what I'd want the output to look like for the example input above: val target = Map( 'a' -> "617", 'b' -> "0", 'c' -> "32", 'd' -> "bc", 'e' -> "ad" ) There may be either a string of digits or arbitrarily many sub-expressions at a given level, but these two kinds of content won't be mixed in a single parenthetical expression. To keep things simple, we'll assume that the stream of names will never contain either duplicates or digits, and that it will always contain enough names for our input. Using parser combinators with a bit of mutable state The example above is a slightly simplified version of the parsing problem in this Stack Overflow question. I answered that question with a solution that looked roughly like this: import scala.util.parsing.combinator._ class ParenParser(names: Iterator[Char]) extends RegexParsers { def paren: Parser[List[(Char, String)]] = "(" ~> contents <~ ")" ^^ { case (s, m) => (names.next -> s) :: m } def contents: Parser[(String, List[(Char, String)])] = "\\d+".r ^^ (_ -> Nil) | rep1(paren) ^^ ( ps => ps.map(_.head._1).mkString -> ps.flatten ) def parse(s: String) = parseAll(paren, s).map(_.toMap) } It's not too bad, but I'd prefer to avoid the mutable state. What I want Haskell's Parsec library makes adding user state to a parser trivially easy: import Control.Applicative ((*>), (<$>), (<*)) import Data.Map (fromList) import Text.Parsec paren = do (s, m) <- char '(' *> contents <* char ')' h : t <- getState putState t return $ (h, s) : m where contents = flip (,) [] <$> many1 digit <|> (\ps -> (map (fst . head) ps, concat ps)) <$> many1 paren main = print $ runParser (fromList <$> paren) ['a'..'z'] "example" "((617)((0)(32)))" This is a fairly straightforward translation of my Scala parser above, but without mutable state. What I've tried I'm trying to get as close to the Parsec solution as I can using Scalaz's state monad transformer, so instead of Parser[A] I'm working with StateT[Parser, Stream[Char], A]. I have a "solution" that allows me to write the following: import scala.util.parsing.combinator._ import scalaz._, Scalaz._ object ParenParser extends ExtraStateParsers[Stream[Char]] with RegexParsers { protected implicit def monadInstance = parserMonad(this) def paren: ESP[List[(Char, String)]] = (lift("(" ) ~> contents <~ lift(")")).flatMap { case (s, m) => get.flatMap( names => put(names.tail).map(_ => (names.head -> s) :: m) ) } def contents: ESP[(String, List[(Char, String)])] = lift("\\d+".r ^^ (_ -> Nil)) | rep1(paren).map( ps => ps.map(_.head._1).mkString -> ps.flatten ) def parse(s: String, names: Stream[Char]) = parseAll(paren.eval(names), s).map(_.toMap) } This works, and it's not that much less concise than either the mutable state version or the Parsec version. But my ExtraStateParsers is ugly as sin—I don't want to try your patience more than I already have, so I won't include it here (although here's a link, if you really want it). I've had to write new versions of every Parser and Parsers method I use above for my ExtraStateParsers and ESP types (rep1, ~>, <~, and |, in case you're counting). If I had needed to use other combinators, I'd have had to write new state transformer-level versions of them as well. Is there a cleaner way to do this? I'd love to see an example of a Scalaz 7's state monad transformer being used to thread state through a parser, but Scala 6 or Haskell examples would also be useful.

    Read the article

  • How to teach game programming at school ?

    - by jokoon
    I'm in this private school right now, and apart from my progressive stoppage of anti-depressants, I'm having an hard time focusing on what the school wants me to do. The school has a professional contract for a game we have to do with Unity. I don't really learn anything new while using unity, so I don't like using it. We recently learned how to use DirectX, and we have to do some sort of Gradius-precursor clone (Parsec) with directX, in 3D: this annoys me, and I'm currently learning to use Ogre3D by myself by making some game. The teacher is an engineer, and all of us won't be engineers. How would you teach game programming ?

    Read the article

  • Create My own language with "Functional Programming Language"

    - by esehara
    I prefer Haskell. I already know How to create my own language with Procedural Language (for example: C, Java, Python, etc). But, I know How to create my own language with Functional Language (for example Haskell, Clojure and Scala). I've already read: Internet Resources Write Yourself a Scheme in 48 Hours Real World Haskell - Chapter 16.Using Persec Writing A Lisp Interpreter In Haskell Parsec, a fast combinator parser Implementing functional languages: a tutorial Books Introduction Functional Programming Using Haskell 2nd Edition -- Haskell StackOverflow (but with procedural language) Learning to write a compiler create my own programming language Source Libraries and tools/HJS -- Haskell Are there any other good sources? I wants to get more links,or sources.

    Read the article

  • how to translate Haskell into Scalaz?

    - by TOB
    One of my high school students and I are going to try to do a port of Haskell's Parsec parser combinator library into Scala. (It has the advantage over Scala's built-in parsing library that you can pass state around fairly easily because all the parsers are monads.) The first hitch I've come across is trying to figure out how Functor works in scalaz. Can someone explain how to convert this Haskell code: data Reply s u a = Ok a !(State s u) ParseError | Error ParseError instance Functor (Reply s u) where fmap f (Ok x s e) = Ok (f x) s e fmap _ (Error e) = Error e -- XXX into Scala (using Scalaz, I assume). I got as far as sealed abstract class Reply[S, U, A] case class Ok[S, U, A](a: A, state: State[S, U], error: ParseError) extends Reply[S, U, A] case class Error[S, U, A](error: ParseError) extends Reply[S, U, A] and know that I should make Reply extend the scalaz.Functor trait, but I can't figure out how to do that. (Mostly I'm having trouble figuring out what the F[_] parameter does.) Any help appreciated! Thanks, Todd

    Read the article

1 2  | Next Page >