Compiler Design

Compiler Design
Looking for GATE Preparation Material? Join & Get here now!
<<Previous Next>>
Introduction Of Tokanisation
Parsing actually starts to get interesting with tokenisation. This is where input
is finally converted into a form that the players couldn’t have typed in
directly.
Here’s the gist of it. You take a pre-processed input line and chunk it into
units called symbols. A symbol is one of:
1. Anything between matching quotation marks, or between an unmatched
quotation mark and the end of the line. Example: "this is a string".
2. Any other piece of punctuation. Examples: ? ; , ! .
3. Any series of digits not bounded by alphabetical characters. Examples: 7,
26. Minus signs can count as part of integers too.
4. Any series of alphanumerical characters. Examples: WALK, DRAGON,
COIN22.
5. Whatever special characters you use to talk to the tokenisation process
directly. I’ll discuss these later.
ADVERTISEMENT
OK, now what you need from the tokeniser is a list of tokens. These are
nodes that represent multiple parts of speech (nouns, verbs etc.), of which
the main part of the parser can then attempt to make sense. They usually
consist of three elements:
1. A type identifier, so you know what kind of token it is.
2. Data (for freestyle tokens).
3. A set of parts of speech that the token can take.
For strings, the type will be some predefined constant, such as T_STRING,
StringType or whatever your naming convention decrees. The data will be the
body of the string, e.g. WHAT?!!. The set of parts of speech will contain some
representation for nouns, and maybe also for verbs. I’ll write this as [noun,
verb]. Don’t panic, I shall explain parts of speech in detail when I reach the
main parsing process in a later article.
For integers, the type will be T_INTEGER or IntegerType or whatever, and the
data will be a number such as 142857. The set of parts of speech will be at
least [noun, adjective], with maybe some others thrown in too.
Punctuation marks will have their own predefined nodes. You can look them
up in a table, it’s simple enough. If you like, you can point some of them to
the same record, e.g. question marks and exclamation marks could be
mapped to the same node as a full stop (my apologies to American readers, I
know you call these latter two "exclamation points" and "periods").
This brings us to words...
The Vocabulary
Words must be translated into atoms (from the inheritance hierarchy, as I
described earlier in this set of articles). The data structure linking the two is
the vocabulary. This consists of a symbol table that connects words, parts of
speech (PoS) and atoms. Here’s an extract showing what a vocabulary might
contain:
Word PoS Atom

Comment
<eat verb eat>
<egg noun egg>
<hit verb hit>
<orange colour adjectiveorange_colour> the colour
<orange noun orange>
the fruit
<box verb hit> as
in the sport of boxing
<box noun box>
the container
If a player typed HIT ORANGE BOX then the tokeniser would need to look up
all definitions of each word and the appropriate possible meanings, i.e.:
HIT <verb hit>

ORANGE <adjective
orange_colour><noun orange>
BOX <verb hit><noun box>
This is done by means of a dictionary mechanism. I’m not going to go into
the details of writing one of these — dictionaries are fairly common data
structures. If you’re not using one from a library, a hash table with binary
tree overflow usually does the business. So long as you have a reasonably
efficient mechanism by which a word can be used to retrieve its matching
record, that’s enough.
There are two further points to consider about vocabularies. Firstly, you
might want to add a fourth component to each tuple to represent privilege
level. If there are some commands that only admins should have, then
there’s no reason these should be in the vocabulary for non-admins — it adds
an extra level of security.
Secondly, some links need only be unidirectional. In the above example, the
verb for BOX is just a synonym that points to the same atom as HIT. If during
execution of [hit]() you wished to refer to the issuing command by looking
backwards through the vocabulary, you wouldn’t want it to come up with
BOX. Therefore, some kind of flag to note that a command is a synonym or
an abbreviation is also in order.
Aside: if you did want [hit]() to refer to BOX then you would use
<box verb box_hit>
which when invoked would be [box_hit](). If box_hit were declared as a
subclass of hit, then the code which was invoked would be the same as for
[hit]() but when the action/verb atom was referred to it would come up as
box_hit.
Compiler Design
Looking for GATE Preparation Material? Join & Get here now!
<<Previous Next>>
LookaHead
As I’ve described it so far, tokenisation is a breeze. You have an array of

characters, which you scan sequentially. Depending on what you see first,
you’ll either have a string, an integer, a word or punctuation. You read in the
whole unit, create a node for it, ignore white space and move on to the next
word. Easy!
Well almost, but not quite. There’s a slight blur between integers, punctuation
and words. Some pieces of punctuation can map directly onto words (see the
discussion on modes which follows), and some words can map directly onto
integers (e.g. TEN is 10). OK, I’m sure you can handle that now you know in
advance to program for it, but there’s a further problem: it’s possible that
some words can carry implicit punctuation effects. When you look up a word,
you therefore ought to check whether it affects the remainder of the
sentence. In particular, you should look out for enquoting verbs.
Enquoting verbs are verbs that implicitly quote the remainder of a sentence.
A normal verb is an action, for example LAUGH. Verbs can take parameters
(unfortunately called objects in grammatical terms), for example EAT
CHEESE. Some verbs can take strings as parameters, for example WRITE
"none of the above" ON BALLOT PAPER. Now, for a few of those verbs that
take strings as a parameter, you really don’t want to have to put in the
quotes every time, for example SAY "hidey hi!". People would much rather
type it without the quotes. If they did that, though, the remainder of the
sentence would be taken as regular input, yet sadly SAY HIDEY HI! doesn’t
parse — it’s not proper English (or proper anything else!).
ADVERTISEMENT
By making SAY is an enquoting verb, however, the problem disappears. If the

next symbol following SAY isn’t a string (i.e. doesn’t begin with a quotation
mark), then the tokeniser will assume it’s seen one anyway and enquote the
rest of the line. Occasionally you do need to put the marks (e.g. SAY "hello"
TO BILL), but if there’s only one parameter you don’t. You can also
implement verbs that enquote their second parameter, e.g. TELL BILL TO "go
west"; they’re not much harder to do. Apart from their effects on
tokenisation, either kind of enquoting verb is otherwise just the same as any
normal verb.
Because each time you look up a symbol you have to check to see if it affects
the remainder of the parse, it’s a one-symbol lookahead system. Computer
languages are typically designed so that you can parse a whole program by
deciding what to do next at any point solely on the basis of what symbol
you’re looking at. As we’ll discover, though, things do get a bit harder for
MUDs at the grammatical (rather than the word) level. Modes
Sometimes, you want to talk directly to the tokeniser to tell it how you want
stuff tokenised. If it parsed this input like a normal command, it wouldn’t
know it was supposed to do something special as a result. More importantly,
it might not be able to parse it at all!
What I’ve been describing so far is command mode. This is where what you
type is considered to be a command. For MUDs, command mode is the mode
in which people spend most of their time.
There are, however, other modes you can have. The convention that has
evolved is to put special characters at the beginning of a line to tell the
tokeniser to operate in a different mode for that line, with a further option to
switch into the mode the whole time until further notice. For example, @
might mean "coding mode for this line only" and /@ might mean "coding
mode for this and subsequent lines".
Here are some examples of common modes and the start-of-line flags they
tend to use (some of which conflict with others):
> / . Command mode: input is a direct command to the game.

@ Coding mode: input is an admin command for programming the game.
" ‘ ` Conversation mode: input is a parameter to the SAY command.
; : Acting mode: input is a parameter to the POSE/EMOTE/ACT command.
? Help mode: input is a parameter to the HELP command.
/\$
Switch mode: input is for the tokeniser itself.
Command mode is the default in text MUDs. Conversation mode is the default
in graphical MUDs.

Compiler Design

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Compiler Design

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Compiler Design

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Compiler Design

Word PoS Atom

HIT <verb hit>

As I’ve described it so far, tokenisation is a breeze. You have an array of

By making SAY is an enquoting verb, however, the problem disappears. If the

> / . Command mode: input is a direct command to the game.

You might also like