Update TODOs

This commit is contained in:
2024-07-07 19:07:35 +01:00
parent 6ae0bbedc5
commit e6c659a14d

171
todo.org
View File

@@ -19,18 +19,15 @@ Languages in the competition:
2024-04-14: Chose C++ cos it will require the least effort to rewrite
the currently existing codebase while still leveraging some less
efficient but incredibly useful features.
* TODO Rewrite lexer
~push.magic~ is a valid PUSH token according to the current lexer.
I'd like to clamp down on this obvious error at the lexer itself, so
the parser can be dedicated to just dealing with address resolution
and conversion to opcodes.
How about an enum which represents the possible type of the operator?
** DONE Write Lexer
** WIP Write Preprocesser
** TODO Write parser
* TODO Better documentation [0%] :DOC:
** TODO Comment coverage [0%]
*** TODO ASM [0%]
**** TODO asm/lexer.h
**** TODO asm/parser.h
** TODO Write a specification
* TODO Preprocessing directives :ASM:
Like in FASM or NASM where we can give certain helpful instructions to
the assembler. I'd use the ~%~ symbol to designate preprocessor
@@ -49,159 +46,6 @@ A call should look something like this:
$name 1 2 3
#+end_src
and those tokens will be substituted literally in the macro body.
* TODO Rewrite preprocesser to create a custom unit instead of token streams
** Problem
A problem that occurs in the preprocessor is token column and line
count. Say =a.asm= has ~%use "b.asm"~. The tokens from the =b.asm=
file are inserted into =a.asm='s token stream, but the line/column
count from there isn't properly set in =a.asm=.
A naive solution would be to just recount the lines and columns, but
this removes information about where those tokens came from. Say an
error occurs in some of =b.asm='s code: I would like to be able to
report them.
Therefore, we can no longer just generate new token streams from the
preprocesser and should instead look at making more complex
abstractions.
A problem this could also solve is nested errors and recursive
constants. Say I have some assembly like so
#+begin_src asm
%const limit 20 %end
%const print-limit
...
push.byte $limit
print.byte
...
%end
#+end_src
A call to ~print-limit~ under the current system would insert the
tokens for print-limit but completely forget about ~push.byte $limit~
which would cause a parsing error. (This could be fixed under the
current system by allowing reference resolution inside of const
blocks, with the conceit that it would be hard to stop infinite recursion)
** Language model
The model I have in mind is that all constructs in this meta language
(the preprocessing language) are either singular tokens or collections
of tokens/constructs in a recursive sense. This naturally follows
from the fact that a single pass isn't enough to properly parse this
language: there must be some recursive nature which forces the
language to take multiple passes to completely generate a stream that
can be parsed.
This vague notion can be formalised like so. A preprocessing unit is
either a singular token or a named collection of units. The former
represents your standard symbols and literals while the later
represents ~%const~ and ~%use~ calls where there is a clear name
associated to a collection of one or more tokens (in the case of the
former it's the constant's name and the latter it's the filename).
We'll distinguish this as well.
#+begin_src text
Token = PP_USE | PP_CONST | String(Content) | Symbol(Content) | PUSH(Content) | ...
Type = File(String) | Constant(Symbol)
Unit = Token | Container(Type . Vector[Unit])
#+end_src
Through this model our initial stream of tokens can be considered
units. We can already see that this model may solve our original
problem: with named containers it doesn't matter that certain tokens
are from different parts of the file or different files as they are
distinctly typed from the general set of tokens, with a name which
states where they're from.
** Processing
We need this model to have a notion of "processing" though, otherwise
it's quite useless. A processing function is simply a function which
takes a unit and returns another unit. We currently have two
processing functions we can consider: ~process_const~ and
~process_use~.
~process_use~ takes a vector of tokens and, upon encountering PP_USE
accepts the next token (a string) and tokenises the file
with that name. Within our model we'd make the stream of tokens
created from opening the file a /container/.
~process_const~ takes a vector of tokens and does two things in an
iteration:
1) upon encountering PP_CONST accepts the next n tokens till PP_END is
encountered, with the first token being a symbol. This is
registered in a map of constants (~CONSTS~) where the symbol is the
key and the value associated is the n - 1 tokens accepted
2) upon encountering a PP_REFERENCE reads the content associated with
it (considered a symbol ~S~) and replaces it ~CONSTS[S]~ (if S is
in CONSTS).
One thing to note is that both of these definitions are easily
extensible to the general definition of units: if a unit is a
container of some kind we can recur through its vector of units to
resolve any further "calls". For ~process_const~ it's ~%const~ or
~$ref~ while for ~process_use~ it's ~%use~.
** History/versioning
One additional facet to this model I'd like to add is "history". Each
unit is actually a list (or a singly linked tree where each parent has
at most one child) of sub-units where the top of the list represents
the current version. Each descendant is a previous version of the
token.
Say I do some processing on an element of the unit list =a= (with
index =i=) such that it becomes a new "unit", call it =b=. Then we
update V by =V[i] = cons(b, a)=. Through this, the lists acts as a
history of processing that has occurred on the unit. This provides an
ability to trace the path of preprocessing to an eventual conclusion.
Processing occurs on a unit until it cannot be done further i.e. when
there are no more "calls" in the tree to resolve. The history list
provides all the versions of a unit till its resolved form.
To see what a unit with history may look like (where symbols are
terminals i.e. completely resolved):
+ Container('limit' . [a Container("b" . d e f) c])
+ Container('limit' . [a '$b' c])
+ Token(PP_REF('$limit'))
This shows resolution of the unit reference ~$limit~, which in turn
leads to the resolution of ~$b~ which is a sub-unit.
There are two ways of indefinite resolution, one per method of
processing. For ~process_use~ it is two files calling ~%use~ on each
other and for ~process_const~ it is a ~%const~ calling itself. We can
just disallow it through analysis.
** Pseudocode
#+begin_src text
process_use(V: Vector[Unit]) ->
[cons((if v is Token(PP_USE) and next(v) is Token(String(S))
-> Container(File(S) . tokenise(open(v')))
else if v is Container(name . units)
-> Container(name . process_use(units))
else
-> v),
v_x)
v = v_x[0]
for v_x in V]
CONSTS={}
process_const(V: Vector[Unit]) ->
[cons((if v is Token(PP_CONST) and next(v) is Token(Symbol(S))
do {
i := find(Token(PP_END), V[v:])
CONSTS[S] = V[next(v):prev(i)]
-> Container(Constant(S) . CONSTS[S])
}
else if v is Token(PP_REF(S))
-> CONSTS[S]
else if v is Container(name . units)
-> Container(name . process_const(units))
else
-> v)
v_x)
v = v_x[0]
for v_x in V]
#+end_src
* TODO Write a specification for the assembly language
In particular the preprocessor macro language and the direct relation
between opcodes and parse units in the assembler.
* Completed
** DONE Write a label/jump system :ASM:
Essentially a user should be able to write arbitrary labels (maybe
@@ -350,3 +194,10 @@ That would be a very simple way of solving the static vs dynamic
linking problem: just include the files you actually need. Even the
standard library would be fine and not require any additional work.
Let's see how this would work.
** DONE Rewrite lexer
~push.magic~ is a valid PUSH token according to the current lexer.
I'd like to clamp down on this obvious error at the lexer itself, so
the parser can be dedicated to just dealing with address resolution
and conversion to opcodes.
How about an enum which represents the possible type of the operator?