When processing my ANTLR4 parse tree by a visitor, sometimes I need to know the parent rule nodes that my rule node is under. In the online API documentation for ParserRuleContext, I find no method/field that can return the name of the rule that an object is representing. I know the rule name is part of the ParserRuleContext's subclass name e.g. function_definition rule node is class Function_definitionContext. But to enquire the class name I need to use Java reflection and manually stripe the Context string at the end.
Is there is simpler method to retrieve the rule name that a ParserRuleContext object is representing?
It is a common requirement to enquire the parent rule node's name. For example, when processing the C++ grammar, a C++ class declaration can be in a global scope, function definition, or another class declaration which means a rule node class_declaration can be nested under a global_scope, function_definition or class_declaration rule node. If I want to isolate only those class_declaration nodes under the global_scope, I need to look up the parent nodes and make sure that they're not function_definition or class_declaration.
To get the rule name from a ParserRuleContext as a string, you can do this:
String[] ruleNames = parser.getRuleNames();
String ruleName = ruleNames[parserRuleContext.getRuleIndex()];
You can also compare the rule index against the generated constants:
boolean isClassDeclaration =
parserRuleContext.getRuleIndex() == MyParser.RULE_class_declaration;
Related
I have just discovered contextSuperClass and have been experimenting with using it to provide scope annotations when building a symbol table in a first pass (I have a forward reference DSL).
I set the option in the grammar:
options {
tokenVocab=MyLexer;
language = CSharp;
contextSuperClass = interpreter.MyParserRuleContext;
}
and I have a class that derives from ParserRuleContext:
public class MyParserRuleContext : ParserRuleContext
{
public MyParserRuleContext()
{ }
public MyParserRuleContext(ParserRuleContext parent, int invokingStateNumber) : base(parent, invokingStateNumber)
{
}
public IScope ContextScope { get; set; }
}
So far so good. I use ParseTreeWalker with a listener (Enter/Exit methods) to walk the tree for the 1st pass and build the symbol table adding local scopes, etc into my ContextScope custom property.
The first issue is of course after the symbol table pass I am at the end of the token stream - the tree is walked.
The 2nd parse uses a visitor to evaluate the final result.
I have two questions:
How do I "reset" the parser so that it is at the root again without loosing scopes I have added into my custom property?
The second question is broader, but similar. Is this even a reasonable way to add scope annotations to the parse tree?
I have previously tried to use ParseTreeProperty<IScope> to add scope annotations, but the problem is similar. During the 2nd phase, the context objects provided in the visitor are not the same objects added to ParseTreeProperty<IScope> concurrent dictionary from the 1st pass - so they are not found. Between the 1st & 2nd passes I have only found parser.reset() as a way to start the parser over, and (of course) it appears to fully reset everything and I loose the any state I created in the 1st pass.
I am likely missing completely missing something here - so any help to put me in the right direction will be greatly appreciated.
To externalize UI strings we use the "Messages-class" approach as supported e.g. in Eclipse and other IDEs. This approach requires that in each package where one needs some UI strings there has to be a class "Messages" that offers a static method String getString(key) via which one obtains the actual String to display to the user. The Strings are internally accessed/fetched using Java's Resources mechanism for i18n.
Esp. after some refactoring - we again and again have accidental imports from a class Messages from a different package.
Thus I would like to create an archunit rule checking whether we only access classes called "Messages" from the very same package. I.e. each import of a class x.y.z.Messages is an error if the package x.y.z is not the same package as the current class (i.e. the class that contains the import)
I got as far as this:
#ArchTest
void preventReferencesToMessagesOutsideCurrentPackage(JavaClasses classes) {
ArchRule rule;
rule = ArchRuleDefinition.noClasses()
.should().accessClassesThat().haveNameMatching("Messages")
.???
;
rule.check(classes);
}
but now I got stuck at the ???.
How can one phrase a condition "and the referenced/imported class "Messages" is not in the same package as this class"?
I somehow got lost with all these archunit methods of which none seems to fit here nor lend itself to compose said condition. Probably I just can't see the forest for the many trees.
Any suggestion or guidance anyone?
You need to operate on instances of JavaAccess to validate the dependencies. JavaAccess provides information about the caller and the target such that you can validate the access dynamically depending on the package name of both classes.
DescribedPredicate<JavaAccess<?>> isForeignMessageClassPredicate =
new DescribedPredicate<JavaAccess<?>>("target is a foreign message class") {
#Override
public boolean apply(JavaAccess<?> access) {
JavaClass targetClass = access.getTarget().getOwner();
if ("Message".equals(targetClass.getSimpleName())) {
JavaClass callerClass = access.getOwner().getOwner();
return !targetClass.getPackageName().equals(callerClass.getPackageName());
}
return false;
}
};
ArchRule rule =
noClasses().should().accessTargetWhere(isForeignMessageClassPredicate);
I am attempting to use the Roslyn SDK and StackExchange.Precompilation (thank you!) to implement aspect-oriented programming in C#6. My specific problem right now is, starting with an IdentifierNameSyntax instance, I want to find the "member type" (method, property, field, var, etc.) that the identifier refers to. (How) can this be done?
Background:
The first proof-of-concept I am working on is some good old design-by-contract. I have a NonNullAttribute which can be applied to parameters, properties, or method return values. Along with the attribute there is a class implementing the StackExchange.Precompilation.ICompileModule interface, which on compilation will insert null checks on the marked parameters or return values.
This is the same idea as PostSharp's NonNullAttribute, but the transformation is being done on one of Roslyn's syntax trees, not on an already compiled assembly. It is also similar to Code Contracts, but with a declarative attribute approach, and again operating on syntax trees not IL.
For example, this source code:
[return: NonNull]
public string Capitalize([NonNull] string text) {
return text.ToUpper();
}
will be transformed into this during precompilation:
[return: NonNull]
public string Capitalize([NonNull] string text) {
if (Object.Equals(text, null))
throw new ArgumentNullException(nameof(text));
var result = text.ToUpper();
if (Object.Equals(result, null))
throw new PostconditionFailedException("Result cannot be null.");
return result;
}
(PostconditionFailedException is a custom exception I made to compliment ArgumentException for return values. If there is already something like this in the framework please let me know.)
For properties with this attribute, there would be a similar transformation, but with preconditions and postconditions implemented separately in the set and get accessors, respectively.
The specific reason I need to find the "member type" of an identifier here is for an optimization on implementing postconditions. Note in the post-compilation sample above, the value that would have been returned is stored in a local variable, checked, and then the local is returned. This storage is necessary for transforming return statements that evaluate a method or complex expression, but if the returned expression is just a field or local variable reference, creating that temporary storage local is wasteful.
So, when the return statement is being scanned, I first check if the statement is of the form ReturnKeyword-IdentifierSyntaxToken-SemicolonToken. If so, I then need to check what that identifier refers to, so I avoid that local variable allocation if the referent is a field or var.
Update
For more context, check out the project this is in reference to on GitHub.
You'll need to use SemanticModel.GetSymbolInfo to determine the symbol an identifier binds to.
Use SemanticModel.GetTypeInfo.Type to obtain the TypeInfo and use it to explore the Type
I need to implement a domain specific language. I have a panel and some shapes on it.
'panel' name = ID '(' title = STRING',' bgcolor = Color',' width = INT',' height = INT ')''{'((rects += Rect)| (ellipse += Ellipse)|(arcs += Arc)|)*'}'
and each shape has a unique rule with some other features. for example:
RoundRect:
'roundrectangle' name = ID '{'
(fill ?= 'filled' (fillpattern?='fillpattern' fillpaint=Paint)?)?
(stroke?='stroke' str=Stroke)?
'paint' paint=Paint
'coordination' x=INT ',' y=INT
'dimention' height=INT ',' width=INT
'arc' archeight=INT ',' arcwidth=INT
'}'
as it obvious in this DSL, I used some references. But I don't know this rules is correct or I should use cross-reference in those?
This rule works fine and I receive the correct output that I expected. But I know when a feature is not of the basic type (string, integer, and so on), it is
actually a reference (an instance of EReference),this is a containment reference, although for non-containment references, the referenced object is stored somewhere else,
for example, in another object of the same resource or even in a different resource.
And point is that a cross-reference is implemented as a non-containment reference.
I need to know when I should use cross-reference and when use containment reference?
As far as I know the difference is as following:
A containment-reference is if you want to reference to the content of a rule so it's just lazy for redefining the rule's content everytime you use the containment-reference.
A cross-reference behaves a bit different: If you use a cross-reference the parser need the user having typed in content of the rule the cross-reference refers to beforeallowing him to refer to that already typed in content.
An example would be a real programming language: A Method call would be a cross-reference as the method of this name should already be declared somewhere in the code because otherwise it doesn't exist. In contrary the normal code would be implemented as a containment-reference as it can be used (for example) within a class, a field or a method and the code you are typing in just needs to fullfill the existance of a few keywords and structures but these are only defined in the parser itself and needn't be defined by the user himself before beeing able to use them.
I hope I have illustrated it well enough so you now know about the difference and the meaning of these reference types.
Greeting Krzmbrzl
Your grammar describes the AST of your language. Therefore, a meta model is derived from your grammar. To describe references between your AST elements you can use containmend references and cross references. A containment reference is used if you want to describe a parent-child relation where the child object is "created" / declared during the parent object is created. A cross reference is used if the parent object points to a child object which is created / declared in an other parent object. To "draw a picture": A containment reference is a top -> bottom reference and a cross reference is a left -> right reference.
For example assume you have a field (private int field = 42;) or method (public void foo() {...}) declaration of a Java class. This declaration is modeled with a containment reference, because a Java class contains field and method declarations. On the other you have a statement field++; within the method body of foo(). There you use the former declared field foo and it is modeled as a cross reference.
In general I would say: Any declaration is modeled as a containment reference and any usage of an already declared whatever is modeled as a cross reference.
I have two classes (class A and B) both marked with [Binding]. Currently I'm using a class per feature. Classes A and B both have a step that looks like this:
[Given(#"an employee (.*) (.*) is a (.*) at (.*)")]
public void GivenAnEmployeeIsAAt(string firstName, string lastName, string role, string businessUnitName)
When I run the scenario for the features defined in class A, and the test runner executes the step indicated above, the matching step in class B gets executed instead.
Are "Steps" global as well? I thought only the "hook" methods are global, i.e. BeforeScenario, AfterScenario. I do not want this behavior for "Given", "Then", and "When". Is there any way to fix this? I tried putting the two classes in different namespaces and this didn't work either.
Also, am I potentially misusing SpecFlow by wanting each "Given" to be independent if I put them in separate classes?
Yes Steps are (per default) global. So you will run into trouble if you define two attributes that have RegExps that matches the same Step. Even if they are in separate classes.
Being in separate classes, or other placement (other assembly even) doesn't have anything to do with how SpecFlow groups it - it's just a big list of Given's, When's and Then's that it try to match the Step against.
But there's a feature called Scoped Steps that solves this problem for you. Check it out here: https://github.com/techtalk/SpecFlow/blob/master/Tests/FeatureTests/ScopedSteps/ScopedSteps.feature
The idea is that you put another attribute (StepScope) on your Step Defintion method and then it will honor that scoping. Like this for example:
[Given(#"I have a step definition that is scoped to tag (?:.*)")]
[StepScope(Tag = "mytag")]
public void GivenIHaveAStepDefinitionThatIsScopedWithMyTag()
{
stepTracker.StepExecuted("Given I have a step definition that is scoped to tag 'mytag'");
}
... or to scope an entire step definition class to a single feature:
[Binding]
[StepScope(Feature = "turning on the light should make it bright")]
public class TurningOnTheLightSteps
{
// ...
}
This step definition is using a StepScope for a tag. You can scope your steps by:
Tag
Scenario title
Feature title
Great question! I hadn't fully understood what that was for until now ;)