Files
rust/crates/ra_parser/src/grammar/patterns.rs

277 lines
6.4 KiB
Rust
Raw Normal View History

use super::*;
2019-01-18 11:02:30 +03:00
pub(super) const PATTERN_FIRST: TokenSet = expressions::LITERAL_FIRST
.union(paths::PATH_FIRST)
2019-08-22 12:15:39 -07:00
.union(token_set![BOX_KW, REF_KW, MUT_KW, L_PAREN, L_BRACK, AMP, UNDERSCORE, MINUS]);
pub(super) fn pattern(p: &mut Parser) {
pattern_r(p, PAT_RECOVERY_SET);
Fix yet another parser infinite loop This commit is an example of fixing a common parser error: infinite loop due to error recovery. This error typically happens when we parse a list of items and fail to parse a specific item at the current position. One choices is to skip a token and try to parse a list item at the next position. This is a good, but not universal, default. When parsing a list of arguments in a function call, you, for example, don't want to skip over `fn`, because it's most likely that it is a function declaration, and not a mistyped arg: ``` fn foo() { quux(1, 2 fn bar() { } ``` Another choice is to bail out of the loop immediately, but it isn't perfect either: sometimes skipping over garbage helps: ``` quux(1, foo:, 92) // should skip over `:`, b/c that's part of `foo::bar` ``` In general, parser tries to balance these two cases, though we don't have a definitive strategy yet. However, if the parser accidentally neither skips over a token, nor breaks out of the loop, then it becomes stuck in the loop infinitely (there's an internal counter to self-check this situation and panic though), and that's exactly what is demonstrated by the test. To fix such situation, first of all, add the test case to tests/data/parser/{err,fuzz-failures}. Then, run ``` RUST_BACKTRACE=short cargo test --package libsyntax2 ```` to verify that parser indeed panics, and to get an idea what grammar production is the culprit (look for `_list` functions!). In this case, I see ``` 10: libsyntax2::grammar::expressions::atom::match_arm_list at crates/libsyntax2/src/grammar/expressions/atom.rs:309 ``` and that's look like it might be a culprit. I verify it by adding `eprintln!("loopy {:?}", p.current());` and indeed I see that this is printed repeatedly. Diagnosing this a bit shows that the problem is that `pattern::pattern` function does not consume anything if the next token is `let`. That is a good default to make cases like ``` let let foo = 92; ``` where the user hasn't typed the pattern yet, to parse in a reasonable they correctly. For match arms, pretty much the single thing we expect is a pattern, so, for a fix, I introduce a special variant of pattern that does not do recovery.
2018-09-08 19:10:20 +03:00
}
/// Parses a pattern list separated by pipes `|`
pub(super) fn pattern_list(p: &mut Parser) {
pattern_list_r(p, PAT_RECOVERY_SET)
}
/// Parses a pattern list separated by pipes `|`
/// using the given `recovery_set`
pub(super) fn pattern_list_r(p: &mut Parser, recovery_set: TokenSet) {
2019-05-15 15:35:47 +03:00
p.eat(T![|]);
pattern_r(p, recovery_set);
2019-05-15 15:35:47 +03:00
while p.eat(T![|]) {
pattern_r(p, recovery_set);
}
}
Fix yet another parser infinite loop This commit is an example of fixing a common parser error: infinite loop due to error recovery. This error typically happens when we parse a list of items and fail to parse a specific item at the current position. One choices is to skip a token and try to parse a list item at the next position. This is a good, but not universal, default. When parsing a list of arguments in a function call, you, for example, don't want to skip over `fn`, because it's most likely that it is a function declaration, and not a mistyped arg: ``` fn foo() { quux(1, 2 fn bar() { } ``` Another choice is to bail out of the loop immediately, but it isn't perfect either: sometimes skipping over garbage helps: ``` quux(1, foo:, 92) // should skip over `:`, b/c that's part of `foo::bar` ``` In general, parser tries to balance these two cases, though we don't have a definitive strategy yet. However, if the parser accidentally neither skips over a token, nor breaks out of the loop, then it becomes stuck in the loop infinitely (there's an internal counter to self-check this situation and panic though), and that's exactly what is demonstrated by the test. To fix such situation, first of all, add the test case to tests/data/parser/{err,fuzz-failures}. Then, run ``` RUST_BACKTRACE=short cargo test --package libsyntax2 ```` to verify that parser indeed panics, and to get an idea what grammar production is the culprit (look for `_list` functions!). In this case, I see ``` 10: libsyntax2::grammar::expressions::atom::match_arm_list at crates/libsyntax2/src/grammar/expressions/atom.rs:309 ``` and that's look like it might be a culprit. I verify it by adding `eprintln!("loopy {:?}", p.current());` and indeed I see that this is printed repeatedly. Diagnosing this a bit shows that the problem is that `pattern::pattern` function does not consume anything if the next token is `let`. That is a good default to make cases like ``` let let foo = 92; ``` where the user hasn't typed the pattern yet, to parse in a reasonable they correctly. For match arms, pretty much the single thing we expect is a pattern, so, for a fix, I introduce a special variant of pattern that does not do recovery.
2018-09-08 19:10:20 +03:00
pub(super) fn pattern_r(p: &mut Parser, recovery_set: TokenSet) {
if let Some(lhs) = atom_pat(p, recovery_set) {
2018-08-08 15:05:33 +03:00
// test range_pat
// fn main() {
// match 92 {
// 0 ... 100 => (),
// 101 ..= 200 => (),
// 200 .. 301=> (),
// }
2018-08-08 15:05:33 +03:00
// }
2019-05-15 15:35:47 +03:00
if p.at(T![...]) || p.at(T![..=]) || p.at(T![..]) {
2018-08-08 15:05:33 +03:00
let m = lhs.precede(p);
p.bump();
Fix yet another parser infinite loop This commit is an example of fixing a common parser error: infinite loop due to error recovery. This error typically happens when we parse a list of items and fail to parse a specific item at the current position. One choices is to skip a token and try to parse a list item at the next position. This is a good, but not universal, default. When parsing a list of arguments in a function call, you, for example, don't want to skip over `fn`, because it's most likely that it is a function declaration, and not a mistyped arg: ``` fn foo() { quux(1, 2 fn bar() { } ``` Another choice is to bail out of the loop immediately, but it isn't perfect either: sometimes skipping over garbage helps: ``` quux(1, foo:, 92) // should skip over `:`, b/c that's part of `foo::bar` ``` In general, parser tries to balance these two cases, though we don't have a definitive strategy yet. However, if the parser accidentally neither skips over a token, nor breaks out of the loop, then it becomes stuck in the loop infinitely (there's an internal counter to self-check this situation and panic though), and that's exactly what is demonstrated by the test. To fix such situation, first of all, add the test case to tests/data/parser/{err,fuzz-failures}. Then, run ``` RUST_BACKTRACE=short cargo test --package libsyntax2 ```` to verify that parser indeed panics, and to get an idea what grammar production is the culprit (look for `_list` functions!). In this case, I see ``` 10: libsyntax2::grammar::expressions::atom::match_arm_list at crates/libsyntax2/src/grammar/expressions/atom.rs:309 ``` and that's look like it might be a culprit. I verify it by adding `eprintln!("loopy {:?}", p.current());` and indeed I see that this is printed repeatedly. Diagnosing this a bit shows that the problem is that `pattern::pattern` function does not consume anything if the next token is `let`. That is a good default to make cases like ``` let let foo = 92; ``` where the user hasn't typed the pattern yet, to parse in a reasonable they correctly. For match arms, pretty much the single thing we expect is a pattern, so, for a fix, I introduce a special variant of pattern that does not do recovery.
2018-09-08 19:10:20 +03:00
atom_pat(p, recovery_set);
2018-08-08 15:05:33 +03:00
m.complete(p, RANGE_PAT);
}
2019-04-30 23:22:48 +08:00
// test marco_pat
// fn main() {
// let m!(x) = 0;
// }
2019-05-15 15:35:47 +03:00
else if lhs.kind() == PATH_PAT && p.at(T![!]) {
2019-04-30 23:22:48 +08:00
let m = lhs.precede(p);
items::macro_call_after_excl(p);
m.complete(p, MACRO_CALL);
}
2018-08-08 15:05:33 +03:00
}
}
2018-08-28 19:35:09 +03:00
const PAT_RECOVERY_SET: TokenSet =
2018-09-03 15:10:06 +03:00
token_set![LET_KW, IF_KW, WHILE_KW, LOOP_KW, MATCH_KW, R_PAREN, COMMA];
2018-08-28 19:35:09 +03:00
Fix yet another parser infinite loop This commit is an example of fixing a common parser error: infinite loop due to error recovery. This error typically happens when we parse a list of items and fail to parse a specific item at the current position. One choices is to skip a token and try to parse a list item at the next position. This is a good, but not universal, default. When parsing a list of arguments in a function call, you, for example, don't want to skip over `fn`, because it's most likely that it is a function declaration, and not a mistyped arg: ``` fn foo() { quux(1, 2 fn bar() { } ``` Another choice is to bail out of the loop immediately, but it isn't perfect either: sometimes skipping over garbage helps: ``` quux(1, foo:, 92) // should skip over `:`, b/c that's part of `foo::bar` ``` In general, parser tries to balance these two cases, though we don't have a definitive strategy yet. However, if the parser accidentally neither skips over a token, nor breaks out of the loop, then it becomes stuck in the loop infinitely (there's an internal counter to self-check this situation and panic though), and that's exactly what is demonstrated by the test. To fix such situation, first of all, add the test case to tests/data/parser/{err,fuzz-failures}. Then, run ``` RUST_BACKTRACE=short cargo test --package libsyntax2 ```` to verify that parser indeed panics, and to get an idea what grammar production is the culprit (look for `_list` functions!). In this case, I see ``` 10: libsyntax2::grammar::expressions::atom::match_arm_list at crates/libsyntax2/src/grammar/expressions/atom.rs:309 ``` and that's look like it might be a culprit. I verify it by adding `eprintln!("loopy {:?}", p.current());` and indeed I see that this is printed repeatedly. Diagnosing this a bit shows that the problem is that `pattern::pattern` function does not consume anything if the next token is `let`. That is a good default to make cases like ``` let let foo = 92; ``` where the user hasn't typed the pattern yet, to parse in a reasonable they correctly. For match arms, pretty much the single thing we expect is a pattern, so, for a fix, I introduce a special variant of pattern that does not do recovery.
2018-09-08 19:10:20 +03:00
fn atom_pat(p: &mut Parser, recovery_set: TokenSet) -> Option<CompletedMarker> {
2018-08-04 15:47:45 +03:00
let la0 = p.nth(0);
let la1 = p.nth(1);
2019-05-15 15:35:47 +03:00
if la0 == T![ref]
|| la0 == T![mut]
|| la0 == T![box]
2019-05-15 15:35:47 +03:00
|| (la0 == IDENT && !(la1 == T![::] || la1 == T!['('] || la1 == T!['{'] || la1 == T![!]))
{
2018-08-08 15:05:33 +03:00
return Some(bind_pat(p, true));
2018-08-04 15:47:45 +03:00
}
if paths::is_use_path_start(p) {
2018-08-08 15:05:33 +03:00
return Some(path_pat(p));
2018-08-04 15:47:45 +03:00
}
if is_literal_pat_start(p) {
return Some(literal_pat(p));
2018-08-08 00:59:16 +03:00
}
2018-08-08 15:05:33 +03:00
let m = match la0 {
2019-05-15 15:35:47 +03:00
T![_] => placeholder_pat(p),
T![&] => ref_pat(p),
T!['('] => tuple_pat(p),
T!['['] => slice_pat(p),
2018-08-08 15:05:33 +03:00
_ => {
Fix yet another parser infinite loop This commit is an example of fixing a common parser error: infinite loop due to error recovery. This error typically happens when we parse a list of items and fail to parse a specific item at the current position. One choices is to skip a token and try to parse a list item at the next position. This is a good, but not universal, default. When parsing a list of arguments in a function call, you, for example, don't want to skip over `fn`, because it's most likely that it is a function declaration, and not a mistyped arg: ``` fn foo() { quux(1, 2 fn bar() { } ``` Another choice is to bail out of the loop immediately, but it isn't perfect either: sometimes skipping over garbage helps: ``` quux(1, foo:, 92) // should skip over `:`, b/c that's part of `foo::bar` ``` In general, parser tries to balance these two cases, though we don't have a definitive strategy yet. However, if the parser accidentally neither skips over a token, nor breaks out of the loop, then it becomes stuck in the loop infinitely (there's an internal counter to self-check this situation and panic though), and that's exactly what is demonstrated by the test. To fix such situation, first of all, add the test case to tests/data/parser/{err,fuzz-failures}. Then, run ``` RUST_BACKTRACE=short cargo test --package libsyntax2 ```` to verify that parser indeed panics, and to get an idea what grammar production is the culprit (look for `_list` functions!). In this case, I see ``` 10: libsyntax2::grammar::expressions::atom::match_arm_list at crates/libsyntax2/src/grammar/expressions/atom.rs:309 ``` and that's look like it might be a culprit. I verify it by adding `eprintln!("loopy {:?}", p.current());` and indeed I see that this is printed repeatedly. Diagnosing this a bit shows that the problem is that `pattern::pattern` function does not consume anything if the next token is `let`. That is a good default to make cases like ``` let let foo = 92; ``` where the user hasn't typed the pattern yet, to parse in a reasonable they correctly. For match arms, pretty much the single thing we expect is a pattern, so, for a fix, I introduce a special variant of pattern that does not do recovery.
2018-09-08 19:10:20 +03:00
p.err_recover("expected pattern", recovery_set);
2018-08-08 15:05:33 +03:00
return None;
}
};
Some(m)
}
fn is_literal_pat_start(p: &mut Parser) -> bool {
2019-05-15 15:35:47 +03:00
p.at(T![-]) && (p.nth(1) == INT_NUMBER || p.nth(1) == FLOAT_NUMBER)
|| p.at_ts(expressions::LITERAL_FIRST)
}
// test literal_pattern
// fn main() {
// match () {
// -1 => (),
// 92 => (),
// 'c' => (),
// "hello" => (),
// }
// }
fn literal_pat(p: &mut Parser) -> CompletedMarker {
assert!(is_literal_pat_start(p));
let m = p.start();
2019-05-15 15:35:47 +03:00
if p.at(T![-]) {
p.bump();
}
expressions::literal(p);
m.complete(p, LITERAL_PAT)
}
2018-08-04 15:47:45 +03:00
// test path_part
// fn foo() {
// let foo::Bar = ();
// let ::Bar = ();
// let Bar { .. } = ();
// let Bar(..) = ();
// }
2018-08-08 15:05:33 +03:00
fn path_pat(p: &mut Parser) -> CompletedMarker {
assert!(paths::is_use_path_start(p));
2018-08-04 15:47:45 +03:00
let m = p.start();
paths::expr_path(p);
let kind = match p.current() {
2019-05-15 15:35:47 +03:00
T!['('] => {
2018-08-04 15:47:45 +03:00
tuple_pat_fields(p);
2018-08-07 14:41:03 +03:00
TUPLE_STRUCT_PAT
2018-08-04 15:47:45 +03:00
}
2019-05-15 15:35:47 +03:00
T!['{'] => {
2018-08-24 19:27:30 +03:00
field_pat_list(p);
2018-08-04 15:47:45 +03:00
STRUCT_PAT
}
_ => PATH_PAT,
2018-08-04 15:47:45 +03:00
};
2018-08-08 15:05:33 +03:00
m.complete(p, kind)
2018-08-04 15:47:45 +03:00
}
// test tuple_pat_fields
// fn foo() {
// let S() = ();
// let S(_) = ();
// let S(_,) = ();
// let S(_, .. , x) = ();
// }
fn tuple_pat_fields(p: &mut Parser) {
2019-05-15 15:35:47 +03:00
assert!(p.at(T!['(']));
2018-08-04 15:47:45 +03:00
p.bump();
2019-05-15 15:35:47 +03:00
pat_list(p, T![')']);
p.expect(T![')']);
2018-08-04 15:47:45 +03:00
}
2018-08-24 19:27:30 +03:00
// test field_pat_list
2018-08-04 15:47:45 +03:00
// fn foo() {
// let S {} = ();
// let S { f, ref mut g } = ();
// let S { h: _, ..} = ();
// let S { h: _, } = ();
// }
2018-08-24 19:27:30 +03:00
fn field_pat_list(p: &mut Parser) {
2019-05-15 15:35:47 +03:00
assert!(p.at(T!['{']));
2018-08-24 19:27:30 +03:00
let m = p.start();
2018-08-04 15:47:45 +03:00
p.bump();
2019-05-15 15:35:47 +03:00
while !p.at(EOF) && !p.at(T!['}']) {
2018-08-04 15:47:45 +03:00
match p.current() {
2019-05-15 15:35:47 +03:00
T![..] => p.bump(),
IDENT if p.nth(1) == T![:] => field_pat(p),
T!['{'] => error_block(p, "expected ident"),
_ => {
bind_pat(p, false);
}
2018-08-04 15:47:45 +03:00
}
2019-05-15 15:35:47 +03:00
if !p.at(T!['}']) {
p.expect(T![,]);
2018-08-04 15:47:45 +03:00
}
}
2019-05-15 15:35:47 +03:00
p.expect(T!['}']);
2018-08-24 19:27:30 +03:00
m.complete(p, FIELD_PAT_LIST);
2018-08-04 15:47:45 +03:00
}
fn field_pat(p: &mut Parser) {
assert!(p.at(IDENT));
2019-05-15 15:35:47 +03:00
assert!(p.nth(1) == T![:]);
let m = p.start();
name(p);
p.bump();
pattern(p);
m.complete(p, FIELD_PAT);
}
// test placeholder_pat
// fn main() { let _ = (); }
2018-08-08 15:05:33 +03:00
fn placeholder_pat(p: &mut Parser) -> CompletedMarker {
2019-05-15 15:35:47 +03:00
assert!(p.at(T![_]));
let m = p.start();
p.bump();
2018-08-08 15:05:33 +03:00
m.complete(p, PLACEHOLDER_PAT)
}
// test ref_pat
// fn main() {
// let &a = ();
// let &mut b = ();
// }
2018-08-08 15:05:33 +03:00
fn ref_pat(p: &mut Parser) -> CompletedMarker {
2019-05-15 15:35:47 +03:00
assert!(p.at(T![&]));
let m = p.start();
p.bump();
2019-05-15 15:35:47 +03:00
p.eat(T![mut]);
pattern(p);
2018-08-08 15:05:33 +03:00
m.complete(p, REF_PAT)
}
2018-08-07 14:41:03 +03:00
// test tuple_pat
// fn main() {
// let (a, b, ..) = ();
// }
2018-08-08 15:05:33 +03:00
fn tuple_pat(p: &mut Parser) -> CompletedMarker {
2019-05-15 15:35:47 +03:00
assert!(p.at(T!['(']));
2018-08-07 14:41:03 +03:00
let m = p.start();
tuple_pat_fields(p);
2018-08-08 15:05:33 +03:00
m.complete(p, TUPLE_PAT)
2018-08-07 14:41:03 +03:00
}
2018-08-07 17:00:45 +03:00
// test slice_pat
// fn main() {
// let [a, b, ..] = [];
// }
2018-08-08 15:05:33 +03:00
fn slice_pat(p: &mut Parser) -> CompletedMarker {
2019-05-15 15:35:47 +03:00
assert!(p.at(T!['[']));
2018-08-07 17:00:45 +03:00
let m = p.start();
p.bump();
2019-05-15 15:35:47 +03:00
pat_list(p, T![']']);
p.expect(T![']']);
2018-09-12 11:26:52 +03:00
m.complete(p, SLICE_PAT)
}
fn pat_list(p: &mut Parser, ket: SyntaxKind) {
while !p.at(EOF) && !p.at(ket) {
2018-08-07 17:00:45 +03:00
match p.current() {
2019-05-15 15:35:47 +03:00
T![..] => p.bump(),
2018-09-12 11:26:52 +03:00
_ => {
if !p.at_ts(PATTERN_FIRST) {
p.error("expected a pattern");
break;
}
pattern(p)
}
2018-08-07 17:00:45 +03:00
}
2018-09-12 11:26:52 +03:00
if !p.at(ket) {
2019-05-15 15:35:47 +03:00
p.expect(T![,]);
2018-08-07 17:00:45 +03:00
}
}
}
// test bind_pat
// fn main() {
// let a = ();
2018-07-31 15:30:11 +03:00
// let mut b = ();
// let ref c = ();
// let ref mut d = ();
// let e @ _ = ();
// let ref mut f @ g @ _ = ();
// let box i = Box::new(1i32);
// }
2018-08-08 15:05:33 +03:00
fn bind_pat(p: &mut Parser, with_at: bool) -> CompletedMarker {
let m = p.start();
p.eat(T![box]);
2019-05-15 15:35:47 +03:00
p.eat(T![ref]);
p.eat(T![mut]);
name(p);
2019-05-15 15:35:47 +03:00
if with_at && p.eat(T![@]) {
pattern(p);
}
2018-08-08 15:05:33 +03:00
m.complete(p, BIND_PAT)
}