Add document for implementation of iterative parser.
This commit is contained in:
parent
140dc0664e
commit
d29e5f96ad
@ -19,3 +19,101 @@ This section records some design and implementation details.
|
||||
## Pow10()
|
||||
|
||||
## Local Stream Copy
|
||||
|
||||
# Parser
|
||||
|
||||
## Iterative Parser
|
||||
|
||||
The iterative parser is a recursive descent LL(1) parser
|
||||
implemented in a non-recursive manner.
|
||||
|
||||
### Grammar
|
||||
|
||||
The grammar used for this parser is based on strict JSON syntax:
|
||||
~~~~~~~~~~
|
||||
S -> array | object
|
||||
array -> [ values ]
|
||||
object -> { members }
|
||||
values -> non-empty-values | ε
|
||||
non-empty-values -> value addition-values
|
||||
addition-values -> ε | , non-empty-values
|
||||
members -> non-empty-members | ε
|
||||
non-empty-members -> member addition-members
|
||||
addition-members -> ε | , non-empty-members
|
||||
member -> STRING : value
|
||||
value -> STRING | NUMBER | NULL | BOOLEAN | object | array
|
||||
~~~~~~~~~~
|
||||
|
||||
Note that left factoring is applied to non-terminals `values` and `members`
|
||||
to make the grammar be LL(1).
|
||||
|
||||
### Parsing Table
|
||||
|
||||
Based on the grammar, we can construct the FIRST and FOLLOW set.
|
||||
|
||||
The FIRST set of non-terminals is listed below:
|
||||
|
||||
| NON-TERMINAL | FIRST |
|
||||
|:-----------------:|:--------------------------------:|
|
||||
| array | [ |
|
||||
| object | { |
|
||||
| values | ε STRING NUMBER NULL BOOLEAN { [ |
|
||||
| addition-values | ε COMMA |
|
||||
| members | ε STRING |
|
||||
| addition-members | ε COMMA |
|
||||
| member | STRING |
|
||||
| value | STRING NUMBER NULL BOOLEAN { [ |
|
||||
| S | [ { |
|
||||
| non-empty-members | STRING |
|
||||
| non-empty-values | STRING NUMBER NULL BOOLEAN { [ |
|
||||
|
||||
The FOLLOW set is listed below:
|
||||
|
||||
| NON-TERMINAL | FOLLOW |
|
||||
|:-----------------:|:-------:|
|
||||
| S | $ |
|
||||
| array | , $ } ] |
|
||||
| object | , $ } ] |
|
||||
| values | ] |
|
||||
| non-empty-values | ] |
|
||||
| addition-values | ] |
|
||||
| members | } |
|
||||
| non-empty-members | } |
|
||||
| addition-members | } |
|
||||
| member | , } |
|
||||
| value | , } ] |
|
||||
|
||||
Finally the parsing table can be constructed from FIRST and FOLLOW set:
|
||||
|
||||
| NON-TERMINAL | [ | { | , | : | ] | } | STRING | NUMBER | NULL | BOOLEAN |
|
||||
|:-----------------:|:---------------------:|:---------------------:|:-------------------:|:-:|:-:|:-:|:-----------------------:|:---------------------:|:---------------------:|:---------------------:|
|
||||
| S | array | object | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| array | [ values ] | | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| object | | { members } | | | | | | | | |
|
||||
| values | non-empty-values | non-empty-values | | | ε | | non-empty-values | non-empty-values | non-empty-values | non-empty-values |
|
||||
| non-empty-values | value addition-values | value addition-values | | | | | value addition-values | value addition-values | value addition-values | value addition-values |
|
||||
| addition-values | | | , non-empty-values | | ε | | | | | |
|
||||
| members | | | | | | ε | non-empty-members | | | |
|
||||
| non-empty-members | | | | | | | member addition-members | | | |
|
||||
| addition-members | | | , non-empty-members | | | ε | | | | |
|
||||
| member | | | | | | | STRING : value | | | |
|
||||
| value | array | object | | | | | STRING | NUMBER | NULL | BOOLEAN |
|
||||
|
||||
There is a great [tool](http://hackingoff.com/compilers/predict-first-follow-set) for above grammar analysis.
|
||||
|
||||
### Implementation
|
||||
|
||||
Based on the parsing table, a direct(or conventional) implementation
|
||||
that pushes the production body in reverse order
|
||||
while generating a production could work.
|
||||
|
||||
In RapidJSON, several modifications(or adaptations to current design) are made to a direct implementation.
|
||||
|
||||
First, the parsing table is encoded in a state machine in RapidJSON.
|
||||
Extra states are added for productions involved with `array` and `object`.
|
||||
In this way the generation of array values or object members would be a single state transition,
|
||||
rather than several pop/push operations in the direct implementation.
|
||||
This also makes the estimation of stack size more easier.
|
||||
|
||||
Second, the iterative parser also keeps track of array's value count and object's member count
|
||||
in its internal stack, which may be different from a conventional implementation.
|
||||
|
Loading…
x
Reference in New Issue
Block a user