From: Bob Rossi <bob@brasko.net>
To: Andrew Cagney <cagney@gnu.org>
Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: GDB/MI Output Syntax
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 21:25:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040826212516.GA21451@white> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <412E5221.8010601@gnu.org>
On Thu, Aug 26, 2004 at 05:12:01PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> >Along with the newline changes, there are 2 other changes that I propose
> >to the grammar. They are,
> >
> >async-record ==> exec-async-output | status-async-output |
> >notify-async-output
> >exec-async-output ==> [ token ] "*" async-output
> >status-async-output ==> [ token ] "+" async-output
> >notify-async-output ==> [ token ] "=" async-output]
>
> FYI, these were done this way so that the complete structure and intent
> was clear (rather than worry about language issues). As you note a
> rewrite gives an ll(1) grammar; it also looses that clarity.
Yes, clarity is very important. Honestly, Michael helped me get the
original grammar to be ll(1). The only problem with the original grammar
that I have found so far is that it is missing a 'nl' on one line.
I only propose rearranging the gramar a little, written in the way
that it is in the doco. Also, I propose that the grammar Michael and I
are working also get posted, and say that it is a dirivative of the
original. Both ways of posting the data are helpful to front end
developers.
The only change to the original grammar I am interested in is to match
the names/rules to be similar to the grammar that Michael and I are
generated (loosing productions we have eliminated, adding productions
that we added, ... ). Either way, I think it would be helpful to say,
here is the grammar, and here is the bison input to the grammar.
In the end, it's up to you guys.
> >The second change is identical but refers to the rules of
> > stream-record ==> console-stream-output | target-stream-output |
> > log-stream-output
> > console-stream-output ==> "~" c-string
> > target-stream-output ==> "@" c-string
> > log-stream-output ==> "&" c-string
> >
> >to
> > stream-record => stream-record-kind c-string
> > stream-record-kind => "~" | "@" | "&"
> >
> >The reason it would be helpful to modify the grammar in this way is that
> >it leads to a more elegant form when trying to build an intermediate
> >representation. At the parse level of 'stream-record' or 'async-record'
> >you have all of the information necessary in order to populate a
> >structure with data. Otherwise, the information is a few levels down
> >stream.
>
> I don't follow.
This may not interest you at all. However, with the rules,
> > stream-record ==> console-stream-output | target-stream-output |
> > log-stream-output
> > console-stream-output ==> "~" c-string
> > target-stream-output ==> "@" c-string
> > log-stream-output ==> "&" c-string
when bison get's to stream-record, it doesn't have available to it the
c-string data. So, I can't do
stream_record: stream_record_class CSTRING {
$$ = malloc ( sizeof ( struct stream_record ) );
$$->stream_record = $1;
$$->cstring = strdup ( gdbmi_text );
};
With the rules,
> > stream-record => stream-record-kind c-string
> > stream-record-kind => "~" | "@" | "&"
I can do the above code, which is nice.
I understand there is other ways to do the same thing, however, this
seems elegant to me.
Thanks,
Bob Rossi
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-08-26 21:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-08-25 15:44 Bob Rossi
2004-08-25 15:57 ` Michael Chastain
2004-08-25 19:37 ` Bob Rossi
2004-08-26 14:01 ` Michael Chastain
2004-08-26 18:31 ` Bob Rossi
2004-08-26 20:44 ` Michael Chastain
2004-08-26 20:52 ` Keith Seitz
2004-08-26 22:16 ` Michael Chastain
2004-08-26 22:03 ` Bob Rossi
2004-08-26 23:06 ` Michael Chastain
2004-08-26 21:13 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-08-26 21:25 ` Bob Rossi [this message]
2004-08-26 22:46 ` Michael Chastain
2004-08-27 10:14 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-08-26 22:41 ` Michael Chastain
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2005-01-06 0:28 Paul Schlie
2005-01-06 0:32 ` Kip Macy
2005-01-06 0:49 ` Paul Schlie
2005-01-06 1:10 ` Bob Rossi
2005-01-06 1:36 ` Paul Schlie
[not found] <1093622671.2836.ezmlm@sources.redhat.com>
2004-08-27 17:56 ` Jim Ingham
2004-08-27 19:12 ` Michael Chastain
2005-01-05 23:27 ` Bob Rossi
2005-01-06 4:48 ` Eli Zaretskii
2005-01-06 23:31 ` Bob Rossi
2005-01-07 0:36 ` Jim Ingham
2005-01-07 1:12 ` Bob Rossi
2005-01-07 3:12 ` Russell Shaw
2005-01-11 19:35 ` Bob Rossi
2005-01-13 2:23 ` Bob Rossi
2004-08-24 3:12 Bob Rossi
2004-08-24 4:15 ` Michael Chastain
2004-08-24 12:30 ` Bob Rossi
2004-08-24 12:50 ` Michael Chastain
2004-08-24 18:59 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-08-24 19:07 ` Bob Rossi
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20040826212516.GA21451@white \
--to=bob@brasko.net \
--cc=cagney@gnu.org \
--cc=gdb@sources.redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).