28 Jun
2013
28 Jun
'13
6:36 p.m.
Yes, I want it that way, very granular. First of all a shortcut methods can be created so
instead of getting an identifier from the method and getting its name, a method node can
can have a 'name' method that will get the name directly.
Personally I will convert this AST to other one greatly simplified. But if someone wants
to parse a Java code he should get a result that is similar to what Java compiler is
working with in a first place. Plus it's easier to maintain wrappers than to introduce
a negation for each node etc...
Надіслано з iPhone
28 черв. 2013 о 19:14 Chris Cunningham <cunningham.cb(a)gmail.com> написав(ла):
So, you'd like to have a
PJArrayVariableAccessorNode and PJArrayVariableDeclarationNode as well to support
http://docs.oracle.com/javase/specs/jls/se7/html/jls-10.html#jls-10.4 and
http://docs.oracle.com/javase/specs/jls/se7/html/jls-10.html#jls-10.2 ? how granular do
you want the AST?
Or am I not understanding what you are asking? I am having a hard time trying to
understand how to translate that web-site into a Node design.
-Chris
On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 8:56 AM, Yuriy Tymchuk <yuriy.tymchuk(a)me.com> wrote:
To be short IMHO it should be as close to
http://docs.oracle.com/javase/specs/jls/se7/html/index.html as possible.
Надіслано з iPhone
28 черв. 2013 о 18:24 Chris Cunningham <cunningham.cb(a)gmail.com> написав(ла):
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev Hi Yuriy,
So, let's talk this through. If a variable is being type cast as something else, how
would you model it? A wrapping node that holds the cast? I chose to inline it with the
accessor itself as being simpler.
When a variable access is being negated, you would also wrap the accessor with a
PJNegationNode, maybe?
And, as for the arrayIndexes, if the accessor is an accessor to a point in the array of
objects, well, how do you model that?
How would you want the models for this java expression:
!super.(OtherType)booleanArray[1][8]
The nodes work for my purposes as-is - I can trace the flow of data through the program,
which is my main intent. That said, I have no objection to it being modeled
better/different, but I do want it modeled at least this well and with at least this much
detail.
What is it that you want? Do you want to go back to the way it was? or do you have a
specific destination in mind?
-Chris
On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 7:39 AM, Yuriy Tymchuk <yuriy.tymchuk(a)me.com> wrote:
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
What negation is doing in MethodInvocation node?
And what negation is doing in the VariableAccessorNode? What type cast is doing in
VariableAccessorNode? Why does variable accessor has array? Is't not accessor_s_.
Accessor. Only one. Accessor only knows only name of the variable it's accessing and
the target of access. During parsing PJVariableAccessorNode is created as part of
identifierWithAccessors, primary and selector grammars.
As for me this is madness. Yes, I made some mess to when I created InfixOperation instead
of all the additive expressions, multiplicative expressions, etc... But to do it right now
you just have to define a new node and create it for a related grammar instead of infix
expression node.
I think that right now PetitJava is a bigger mess than it was
Надіслано з iPhone
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev