Chapter 2: A Simple One Pass Compiler Prof. Steven A. Demurjian Computer Science & Engineering Department The University of Connecticut 371 Fairfield Way, Unit 2155 Storrs, CT 06269-3155 steve@engr.uconn.edu http://www.engr.uconn.edu/~steve (860) 486 - 4818 Material for course thanks to: Laurent Michel Aggelos Kiayias Robert LeBarre

The Entire Compilation Process Grammars for Syntax Definition Syntax-Directed Translation Parsing - Top Down & Predictive Pulling Together the Pieces The Lexical Analysis Process Symbol Table Considerations A Brief Look at Code Generation Concluding Remarks/Looking Ahead

Grammars for Syntax Definition A Context-free Grammar (CFG) Is Utilized to Describe the Syntactic Structure of a Language A CFG Is Characterized By: 1. A Set of Tokens or Terminal Symbols 2. A Set of Non-terminals 3. A Set of Production Rules Each Rule Has the Form NT  {T, NT}* 4. A Non-terminal Designated As the Start Symbol

Grammars for Syntax Definition Example CFG list  list + digit list  list - digit list  digit digit  0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 (the “|” means OR) (So we could have written list  list + digit | list - digit | digit )

Grammars are Used to Derive Strings: Using the CFG defined on the previous slide, we can derive the string: 9 - 5 + 2 as follows: list  list + digit  list - digit + digit  digit - digit + digit  9 - digit + digit  9 - 5 + digit  9 - 5 + 2 P1 : list  list + digit P2 : list  list - digit P3 : list  digit P4 : digit  9 P4 : digit  5 P4 : digit  2

Grammars are Used to Derive Strings: This derivation could also be represented via a Parse Tree (parents on left, children on right) list digit 9 5 2 - + list  list + digit  list - digit + digit  digit - digit + digit  9 - digit + digit  9 - 5 + digit  9 - 5 + 2

A More Complex Grammar What is this grammar for ? block  begin opt_stmts end opt_stmts  stmt_list |  stmt_list  stmt_list ; stmt | stmt What is this grammar for ? What does “” represent ? What kind of production rule is this ?

Defining a Parse Tree More Formally, a Parse Tree for a CFG Has the Following Properties: Root Is Labeled With the Start Symbol Leaf Node Is a Token or  Interior Node (Now Leaf) Is a Non-Terminal If A  x1x2…xn, Then A Is an Interior; x1x2…xn Are Children of A and May Be Non-Terminals or Tokens

Other Important Concepts Ambiguity Two derivations (Parse Trees) for the same token string. string - 9 + 5 2 string + 2 - 5 9 Grammar: string  string + string | string – string | 0 | 1 | …| 9 Why is this a Problem ?

Other Important Concepts Associativity of Operators Left vs. Right right letter c b a - + list digit 9 5 2 - + right  letter + right | letter – right | letter letter  a | b | c | …| z

Other Important Concepts Operator Precedence What does 9 + 5 * 2 mean? ( ) * / + - is precedence order Typically This can be incorporated into a grammar via rules: expr  expr + term | expr – term | term term  term * factor | term / factor | factor factor  digit | ( expr ) digit  0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | … | 9 Precedemce Achieved by: expr & term for each precedence level Rules for each are left recursive or associate to the left

Syntax-Directed Translation Associate Attributes With Grammar Rules & Constructs and Translate As Parsing Occurs Our Example Uses Infix to Postfix Notation Translation for Expressions Translation May Be Defined Inductively As: Postfix(e), E is an Expression 1. If E is a variable | constant  Postfix(E) = E 2. If E is E1 op E2  Postfix(E) = Postfix(E1 op E2) = Postfix(E1) Postfix(E2) op 3. If E is (E1)  Postfix(E) = Postfix(E1) Examples: ( 9 – 5 ) + 2  9 5 – 2 + 9 – ( 5 + 2 )  9 5 2 + -

Syntax-Directed Definition: (2 parts) Each Production Has a Set of Semantic Rules Each Grammar Symbol Has a Set of Attributes For the Following Example, String Attribute “t” is Associated With Each Grammar Symbol, i.e., What is a Derivation for 9 + 5 - 2? expr  expr – term | expr + term | term term  0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | … | 9

Derivation for 9 + 5 - 2 expr  expr – term | expr + term | term Using Rule expr  expr + term  expr – term + term  term – term + term  9 – term + term  9 – 5 + term  9 – 5 + 2 expr  expr + term expr  term term  9 term  5 term  2

Syntax-Directed Definition: (2 parts) Each Production Rule of the CFG Has a Semantic Rule Note: Semantic Rules for expr Use Synthesized Attributes Which Obtain Their Values From Other Rules. Production Semantic Rule expr  expr + term expr.t := expr.t || term.t || ‘+’ expr  expr – term expr.t := expr.t || term.t || ’-’ expr  term expr.t := term.t term  0 term.t := ‘0’ term  1 term.t := ‘1’ …. …. term  9 term.t := ‘9’

Semantic Rules are Embedded in Parse Tree expr.t =95- expr.t =9 expr.t =95-2+ term.t =5 term.t =2 term.t =9 2 + 5 - 9 How Do Semantic Rules Work ? What Type of Tree Traversal is Being Performed? How Can We More Closely Associate Semantic Rules With Production Rules ?

Examples rest + term rest  rest + term {print(‘+’)}rest (Print ‘+’ After term for postfix translation) expr  expr + term {print(‘+’)}  expr - term {print(‘-’)}  term term  0 {print(‘0’)} term  1 {print(‘1’)} … term  9 {print(‘9’)} term expr 9 5 2 - + {print(‘-’)} {print(‘9’)} {print(‘5’)} {print(‘2’)} {print(‘+’)}

Parsing – Top-Down & Predictive Top-Down Parsing  Parse tree / derivation of a token string occurs in a top down fashion. For Example, Consider: type  simple |  id | array [ simple ] of type simple  integer | char | num dotdot num Suppose input is : array [ num dotdot num ] of integer The parse would begin with the rule type  array [ simple ] of type

Top-Down Parse (type = start symbol) Input : array [ num dotdot num ] of integer type ] simple of [ array Tokens type ] simple of [ array num dotdot

Top-Down Parse (type = start symbol) Input : array [ num dotdot num ] of integer type ] simple of [ array num dotdot type ] simple of [ array num dotdot integer

Top-Down Process Recursive Descent or Predictive Parsing Parser Operates by Attempting to Match Tokens in the Input Stream Utilize both Grammar and Input Below to Motivate Code for Algorithm array [ num dotdot num ] of integer type  simple |  id | array [ simple ] of type simple  integer | char | num dotdot num procedure match ( t : token ) ; begin if lookahead = t then lookahead : = nexttoken else error end ;

Top-Down Algorithm (Continued) procedure type ; begin if lookahead is in { integer, char, num } then simple else if lookahead = ‘’ then begin match (‘’ ) ; match( id ) end else if lookahead = array then begin match( array ); match(‘[‘); simple; match(‘]’); match(of); type end else error end ; procedure simple ; if lookahead = integer then match ( integer ); else if lookahead = char then match ( char ); else if lookahead = num then begin match (num); match (dotdot); match (num)

Problem with Top Down Parsing Left Recursion in CFG May Cause Parser to Loop Forever Left – made right choice Right – top down parsing could keep making wrong choice expr  expr + term | expr - term | term term  0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 expr  expr + term  expr – term + term  term – term + term  9 – term + term  9 – 5 + term  9 – 5 + 2 expr  expr + term  expr – term + term  expr – term – term + term  expr – expr – term – term + term  etc.

Problem with Top Down Parsing Solution: Algorithm to Remove Left Recursion expr  expr + term | expr - term | term term  0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 expr  term rest rest  + term rest | - term rest |  term  0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 * New Semantic Actions ! rest  + term {print(‘+’)} rest | - term {print(‘-’)} rest | 

Comparing Grammars with Left Recursion Notice Location of Semantic Actions in Tree What is Order of Processing? expr term {print(‘2’)} {print(‘+’)} {print(‘5’)} {print(‘-’)} {print(‘9’)} 5 + 2 - 9

Comparing Grammars without Left Recursion Now, Notice Location of Semantic Actions in Tree for Revised Grammar What is Order of Processing in this Case? {print(‘2’)} expr term term {print(‘-’)} term {print(‘+’)} {print(‘5’)} {print(‘9’)} rest 2 5 - 9 +  rest

The Lexical Analysis Process A Graphical Depiction returns token to caller uses getchar ( ) to read character lexan ( ) lexical analyzer pushes back c using ungetc (c , stdin) tokenval Sets global variable to attribute value

The Lexical Analysis Process Functional Responsibilities Input Token String Is Broken Down White Space and Comments Are Filtered Out Individual Tokens With Associated Values Are Identified Symbol Table Is Initialized and Entries Are Constructed for Each “Appropriate” Token Under What Conditions will a Character be Pushed Back? Can You Cite Some Examples in Programming Language Statements?

Algorithm for Lexical Analyzer function lexan: integer ; var lexbuf : array[ 0 .. 100 ] of char ; c : char ; begin loop begin read a character into c ; if c is a blank or a tab then do nothing else if c is a newline then lineno : = lineno + 1 else if c is a digit then begin set tokenval to the value of this and following digits ; return NUM end

Algorithm for Lexical Analyzer else if c is a letter then begin place c and successive letters and digits into lexbuf ; p : = lookup ( lexbuf ) ; if p = 0 then p : = iinsert ( lexbf, ID) ; tokenval : = p return the token field of table entry p end else / * token is a single character * / set tokenval to NONE ; / * there is no attribute * / return integer encoding of character c Note: Insert / Lookup operations occur against the Symbol Table !

Symbol Table Considerations OPERATIONS: Insert (string, token_ID) Lookup (string) NOTICE: Reserved words are placed into symbol table for easy lookup Attributes may be associated with each entry, i.e., Semantic Actions Typing Info: id  integer etc. ARRAY symtable lexptr token attributes div mod id 1 2 3 4 d i v EOS m o d EOS c o u n t EOS i EOS ARRAY lexemes

A Brief Look at Code Generation Back-end of Compilation Process - Which Will Not Be Our Emphasis We’ll Focus on Front-end Important Concepts to Re-emphasize •• Abstract Syntax Machine for Intermediate Code Generation •• L-value Vs. R-value I : = 5 ; L - Location I : = I + 1 ; R - Contents May Be Attributes in Symbol Table

A Brief Look at Code Generation Employ Statement Templates for Code Generation. Each Template Characterizes the Translation Different Templates for Each Major Programming Language Construct, if, while, procedure, etc. WHILE IF label test code for expr code for expr gofalse out gofalse out code for stmt code for stmt label out goto test label out

Concluding Remarks / Looking Ahead We’ve Reviewed / Highlighted Entire Compilation Process Introduced Context-free Grammars (CFG) and Indicated /Illustrated Relationship to Compiler Theory Reviewed Many Different Versions of Parse Trees That Assist in Both Recognition and Translation We’ll Return to Beginning - Lexical Analysis We’ll Explore Close Relationship of Lexical Analysis to Regular Expressions, Grammars, and Finite Automatons