1 /* Copyright (c) 2012-2017 The ANTLR Project. All rights reserved.
2 * Use of this file is governed by the BSD 3-clause license that
3 * can be found in the LICENSE.txt file in the project root.
8 #include "support/BitSet.h"
14 * This enumeration defines the prediction modes available in ANTLR 4 along with
15 * utility methods for analyzing configuration sets for conflicts and/or
18 enum class PredictionMode {
20 * The SLL(*) prediction mode. This prediction mode ignores the current
21 * parser context when making predictions. This is the fastest prediction
22 * mode, and provides correct results for many grammars. This prediction
23 * mode is more powerful than the prediction mode provided by ANTLR 3, but
24 * may result in syntax errors for grammar and input combinations which are
28 * When using this prediction mode, the parser will either return a correct
29 * parse tree (i.e. the same parse tree that would be returned with the
30 * {@link #LL} prediction mode), or it will report a syntax error. If a
31 * syntax error is encountered when using the {@link #SLL} prediction mode,
32 * it may be due to either an actual syntax error in the input or indicate
33 * that the particular combination of grammar and input requires the more
34 * powerful {@link #LL} prediction abilities to complete successfully.</p>
37 * This prediction mode does not provide any guarantees for prediction
38 * behavior for syntactically-incorrect inputs.</p>
43 * The LL(*) prediction mode. This prediction mode allows the current parser
44 * context to be used for resolving SLL conflicts that occur during
45 * prediction. This is the fastest prediction mode that guarantees correct
46 * parse results for all combinations of grammars with syntactically correct
50 * When using this prediction mode, the parser will make correct decisions
51 * for all syntactically-correct grammar and input combinations. However, in
52 * cases where the grammar is truly ambiguous this prediction mode might not
53 * report a precise answer for <em>exactly which</em> alternatives are
57 * This prediction mode does not provide any guarantees for prediction
58 * behavior for syntactically-incorrect inputs.</p>
63 * The LL(*) prediction mode with exact ambiguity detection. In addition to
64 * the correctness guarantees provided by the {@link #LL} prediction mode,
65 * this prediction mode instructs the prediction algorithm to determine the
66 * complete and exact set of ambiguous alternatives for every ambiguous
67 * decision encountered while parsing.
70 * This prediction mode may be used for diagnosing ambiguities during
71 * grammar development. Due to the performance overhead of calculating sets
72 * of ambiguous alternatives, this prediction mode should be avoided when
73 * the exact results are not necessary.</p>
76 * This prediction mode does not provide any guarantees for prediction
77 * behavior for syntactically-incorrect inputs.</p>
79 LL_EXACT_AMBIG_DETECTION
82 class ANTLR4CPP_PUBLIC PredictionModeClass {
85 * Computes the SLL prediction termination condition.
88 * This method computes the SLL prediction termination condition for both of
89 * the following cases.</p>
92 * <li>The usual SLL+LL fallback upon SLL conflict</li>
93 * <li>Pure SLL without LL fallback</li>
96 * <p><strong>COMBINED SLL+LL PARSING</strong></p>
98 * <p>When LL-fallback is enabled upon SLL conflict, correct predictions are
99 * ensured regardless of how the termination condition is computed by this
100 * method. Due to the substantially higher cost of LL prediction, the
101 * prediction should only fall back to LL when the additional lookahead
102 * cannot lead to a unique SLL prediction.</p>
104 * <p>Assuming combined SLL+LL parsing, an SLL configuration set with only
105 * conflicting subsets should fall back to full LL, even if the
106 * configuration sets don't resolve to the same alternative (e.g.
107 * {@code {1,2}} and {@code {3,4}}. If there is at least one non-conflicting
108 * configuration, SLL could continue with the hopes that more lookahead will
109 * resolve via one of those non-conflicting configurations.</p>
111 * <p>Here's the prediction termination rule them: SLL (for SLL+LL parsing)
112 * stops when it sees only conflicting configuration subsets. In contrast,
113 * full LL keeps going when there is uncertainty.</p>
115 * <p><strong>HEURISTIC</strong></p>
117 * <p>As a heuristic, we stop prediction when we see any conflicting subset
118 * unless we see a state that only has one alternative associated with it.
119 * The single-alt-state thing lets prediction continue upon rules like
120 * (otherwise, it would admit defeat too soon):</p>
122 * <p>{@code [12|1|[], 6|2|[], 12|2|[]]. s : (ID | ID ID?) ';' ;}</p>
124 * <p>When the ATN simulation reaches the state before {@code ';'}, it has a
125 * DFA state that looks like: {@code [12|1|[], 6|2|[], 12|2|[]]}. Naturally
126 * {@code 12|1|[]} and {@code 12|2|[]} conflict, but we cannot stop
127 * processing this node because alternative to has another way to continue,
128 * via {@code [6|2|[]]}.</p>
130 * <p>It also let's us continue for this rule:</p>
132 * <p>{@code [1|1|[], 1|2|[], 8|3|[]] a : A | A | A B ;}</p>
134 * <p>After matching input A, we reach the stop state for rule A, state 1.
135 * State 8 is the state right before B. Clearly alternatives 1 and 2
136 * conflict and no amount of further lookahead will separate the two.
137 * However, alternative 3 will be able to continue and so we do not stop
138 * working on this state. In the previous example, we're concerned with
139 * states associated with the conflicting alternatives. Here alt 3 is not
140 * associated with the conflicting configs, but since we can continue
141 * looking for input reasonably, don't declare the state done.</p>
143 * <p><strong>PURE SLL PARSING</strong></p>
145 * <p>To handle pure SLL parsing, all we have to do is make sure that we
146 * combine stack contexts for configurations that differ only by semantic
147 * predicate. From there, we can do the usual SLL termination heuristic.</p>
149 * <p><strong>PREDICATES IN SLL+LL PARSING</strong></p>
151 * <p>SLL decisions don't evaluate predicates until after they reach DFA stop
152 * states because they need to create the DFA cache that works in all
153 * semantic situations. In contrast, full LL evaluates predicates collected
154 * during start state computation so it can ignore predicates thereafter.
155 * This means that SLL termination detection can totally ignore semantic
158 * <p>Implementation-wise, {@link ATNConfigSet} combines stack contexts but not
159 * semantic predicate contexts so we might see two configurations like the
162 * <p>{@code (s, 1, x, {}), (s, 1, x', {p})}</p>
164 * <p>Before testing these configurations against others, we have to merge
165 * {@code x} and {@code x'} (without modifying the existing configurations).
166 * For example, we test {@code (x+x')==x''} when looking for conflicts in
167 * the following configurations.</p>
169 * <p>{@code (s, 1, x, {}), (s, 1, x', {p}), (s, 2, x'', {})}</p>
171 * <p>If the configuration set has predicates (as indicated by
172 * {@link ATNConfigSet#hasSemanticContext}), this algorithm makes a copy of
173 * the configurations to strip out all of the predicates so that a standard
174 * {@link ATNConfigSet} will merge everything ignoring predicates.</p>
176 static bool hasSLLConflictTerminatingPrediction(PredictionMode mode, ATNConfigSet *configs);
179 /// Checks if any configuration in {@code configs} is in a
180 /// <seealso cref="RuleStopState"/>. Configurations meeting this condition have
182 /// the end of the decision rule (local context) or end of start rule (full
185 /// <param name="configs"> the configuration set to test </param>
186 /// <returns> {@code true} if any configuration in {@code configs} is in a
187 /// <seealso cref="RuleStopState"/>, otherwise {@code false} </returns>
188 static bool hasConfigInRuleStopState(ATNConfigSet *configs);
191 /// Checks if all configurations in {@code configs} are in a
192 /// <seealso cref="RuleStopState"/>. Configurations meeting this condition have
194 /// the end of the decision rule (local context) or end of start rule (full
197 /// <param name="configs"> the configuration set to test </param>
198 /// <returns> {@code true} if all configurations in {@code configs} are in a
199 /// <seealso cref="RuleStopState"/>, otherwise {@code false} </returns>
200 static bool allConfigsInRuleStopStates(ATNConfigSet *configs);
203 * Full LL prediction termination.
205 * <p>Can we stop looking ahead during ATN simulation or is there some
206 * uncertainty as to which alternative we will ultimately pick, after
207 * consuming more input? Even if there are partial conflicts, we might know
208 * that everything is going to resolve to the same minimum alternative. That
209 * means we can stop since no more lookahead will change that fact. On the
210 * other hand, there might be multiple conflicts that resolve to different
211 * minimums. That means we need more look ahead to decide which of those
212 * alternatives we should predict.</p>
214 * <p>The basic idea is to split the set of configurations {@code C}, into
215 * conflicting subsets {@code (s, _, ctx, _)} and singleton subsets with
216 * non-conflicting configurations. Two configurations conflict if they have
217 * identical {@link ATNConfig#state} and {@link ATNConfig#context} values
218 * but different {@link ATNConfig#alt} value, e.g. {@code (s, i, ctx, _)}
219 * and {@code (s, j, ctx, _)} for {@code i!=j}.</p>
221 * <p>Reduce these configuration subsets to the set of possible alternatives.
222 * You can compute the alternative subsets in one pass as follows:</p>
224 * <p>{@code A_s,ctx = {i | (s, i, ctx, _)}} for each configuration in
225 * {@code C} holding {@code s} and {@code ctx} fixed.</p>
227 * <p>Or in pseudo-code, for each configuration {@code c} in {@code C}:</p>
230 * map[c] U= c.{@link ATNConfig#alt alt} # map hash/equals uses s and x, not
234 * <p>The values in {@code map} are the set of {@code A_s,ctx} sets.</p>
236 * <p>If {@code |A_s,ctx|=1} then there is no conflict associated with
237 * {@code s} and {@code ctx}.</p>
239 * <p>Reduce the subsets to singletons by choosing a minimum of each subset. If
240 * the union of these alternative subsets is a singleton, then no amount of
241 * more lookahead will help us. We will always pick that alternative. If,
242 * however, there is more than one alternative, then we are uncertain which
243 * alternative to predict and must continue looking for resolution. We may
244 * or may not discover an ambiguity in the future, even if there are no
245 * conflicting subsets this round.</p>
247 * <p>The biggest sin is to terminate early because it means we've made a
248 * decision but were uncertain as to the eventual outcome. We haven't used
249 * enough lookahead. On the other hand, announcing a conflict too late is no
250 * big deal; you will still have the conflict. It's just inefficient. It
251 * might even look until the end of file.</p>
253 * <p>No special consideration for semantic predicates is required because
254 * predicates are evaluated on-the-fly for full LL prediction, ensuring that
255 * no configuration contains a semantic context during the termination
258 * <p><strong>CONFLICTING CONFIGS</strong></p>
260 * <p>Two configurations {@code (s, i, x)} and {@code (s, j, x')}, conflict
261 * when {@code i!=j} but {@code x=x'}. Because we merge all
262 * {@code (s, i, _)} configurations together, that means that there are at
263 * most {@code n} configurations associated with state {@code s} for
264 * {@code n} possible alternatives in the decision. The merged stacks
265 * complicate the comparison of configuration contexts {@code x} and
266 * {@code x'}. Sam checks to see if one is a subset of the other by calling
267 * merge and checking to see if the merged result is either {@code x} or
268 * {@code x'}. If the {@code x} associated with lowest alternative {@code i}
269 * is the superset, then {@code i} is the only possible prediction since the
270 * others resolve to {@code min(i)} as well. However, if {@code x} is
271 * associated with {@code j>i} then at least one stack configuration for
272 * {@code j} is not in conflict with alternative {@code i}. The algorithm
273 * should keep going, looking for more lookahead due to the uncertainty.</p>
275 * <p>For simplicity, I'm doing a equality check between {@code x} and
276 * {@code x'} that lets the algorithm continue to consume lookahead longer
277 * than necessary. The reason I like the equality is of course the
278 * simplicity but also because that is the test you need to detect the
279 * alternatives that are actually in conflict.</p>
281 * <p><strong>CONTINUE/STOP RULE</strong></p>
283 * <p>Continue if union of resolved alternative sets from non-conflicting and
284 * conflicting alternative subsets has more than one alternative. We are
285 * uncertain about which alternative to predict.</p>
287 * <p>The complete set of alternatives, {@code [i for (_,i,_)]}, tells us which
288 * alternatives are still in the running for the amount of input we've
289 * consumed at this point. The conflicting sets let us to strip away
290 * configurations that won't lead to more states because we resolve
291 * conflicts to the configuration with a minimum alternate for the
292 * conflicting set.</p>
294 * <p><strong>CASES</strong></p>
298 * <li>no conflicts and more than 1 alternative in set => continue</li>
300 * <li> {@code (s, 1, x)}, {@code (s, 2, x)}, {@code (s, 3, z)},
301 * {@code (s', 1, y)}, {@code (s', 2, y)} yields non-conflicting set
302 * {@code {3}} U conflicting sets {@code min({1,2})} U {@code min({1,2})} =
303 * {@code {1,3}} => continue
306 * <li>{@code (s, 1, x)}, {@code (s, 2, x)}, {@code (s', 1, y)},
307 * {@code (s', 2, y)}, {@code (s'', 1, z)} yields non-conflicting set
308 * {@code {1}} U conflicting sets {@code min({1,2})} U {@code min({1,2})} =
309 * {@code {1}} => stop and predict 1</li>
311 * <li>{@code (s, 1, x)}, {@code (s, 2, x)}, {@code (s', 1, y)},
312 * {@code (s', 2, y)} yields conflicting, reduced sets {@code {1}} U
313 * {@code {1}} = {@code {1}} => stop and predict 1, can announce
314 * ambiguity {@code {1,2}}</li>
316 * <li>{@code (s, 1, x)}, {@code (s, 2, x)}, {@code (s', 2, y)},
317 * {@code (s', 3, y)} yields conflicting, reduced sets {@code {1}} U
318 * {@code {2}} = {@code {1,2}} => continue</li>
320 * <li>{@code (s, 1, x)}, {@code (s, 2, x)}, {@code (s', 3, y)},
321 * {@code (s', 4, y)} yields conflicting, reduced sets {@code {1}} U
322 * {@code {3}} = {@code {1,3}} => continue</li>
326 * <p><strong>EXACT AMBIGUITY DETECTION</strong></p>
328 * <p>If all states report the same conflicting set of alternatives, then we
329 * know we have the exact ambiguity set.</p>
331 * <p><code>|A_<em>i</em>|>1</code> and
332 * <code>A_<em>i</em> = A_<em>j</em></code> for all <em>i</em>, <em>j</em>.</p>
334 * <p>In other words, we continue examining lookahead until all {@code A_i}
335 * have more than one alternative and all {@code A_i} are the same. If
336 * {@code A={{1,2}, {1,3}}}, then regular LL prediction would terminate
337 * because the resolved set is {@code {1}}. To determine what the real
338 * ambiguity is, we have to know whether the ambiguity is between one and
339 * two or one and three so we keep going. We can only stop prediction when
340 * we need exact ambiguity detection when the sets look like
341 * {@code A={{1,2}}} or {@code {{1,2},{1,2}}}, etc...</p>
343 static size_t resolvesToJustOneViableAlt(const std::vector<antlrcpp::BitSet> &altsets);
346 /// Determines if every alternative subset in {@code altsets} contains more
347 /// than one alternative.
349 /// <param name="altsets"> a collection of alternative subsets </param>
350 /// <returns> {@code true} if every <seealso cref="BitSet"/> in {@code altsets}
352 /// <seealso cref="BitSet#cardinality cardinality"/> > 1, otherwise {@code
353 /// false} </returns>
354 static bool allSubsetsConflict(const std::vector<antlrcpp::BitSet> &altsets);
357 /// Determines if any single alternative subset in {@code altsets} contains
358 /// exactly one alternative.
360 /// <param name="altsets"> a collection of alternative subsets </param>
361 /// <returns> {@code true} if {@code altsets} contains a <seealso
362 /// cref="BitSet"/> with
363 /// <seealso cref="BitSet#cardinality cardinality"/> 1, otherwise {@code false}
365 static bool hasNonConflictingAltSet(const std::vector<antlrcpp::BitSet> &altsets);
368 /// Determines if any single alternative subset in {@code altsets} contains
369 /// more than one alternative.
371 /// <param name="altsets"> a collection of alternative subsets </param>
372 /// <returns> {@code true} if {@code altsets} contains a <seealso
373 /// cref="BitSet"/> with
374 /// <seealso cref="BitSet#cardinality cardinality"/> > 1, otherwise {@code
375 /// false} </returns>
376 static bool hasConflictingAltSet(const std::vector<antlrcpp::BitSet> &altsets);
379 /// Determines if every alternative subset in {@code altsets} is equivalent.
381 /// <param name="altsets"> a collection of alternative subsets </param>
382 /// <returns> {@code true} if every member of {@code altsets} is equal to the
383 /// others, otherwise {@code false} </returns>
384 static bool allSubsetsEqual(const std::vector<antlrcpp::BitSet> &altsets);
387 /// Returns the unique alternative predicted by all alternative subsets in
388 /// {@code altsets}. If no such alternative exists, this method returns
389 /// <seealso cref="ATN#INVALID_ALT_NUMBER"/>.
391 /// <param name="altsets"> a collection of alternative subsets </param>
392 static size_t getUniqueAlt(const std::vector<antlrcpp::BitSet> &altsets);
395 /// Gets the complete set of represented alternatives for a collection of
396 /// alternative subsets. This method returns the union of each <seealso
398 /// in {@code altsets}.
400 /// <param name="altsets"> a collection of alternative subsets </param>
401 /// <returns> the set of represented alternatives in {@code altsets} </returns>
402 static antlrcpp::BitSet getAlts(const std::vector<antlrcpp::BitSet> &altsets);
404 /** Get union of all alts from configs. @since 4.5.1 */
405 static antlrcpp::BitSet getAlts(ATNConfigSet *configs);
408 /// This function gets the conflicting alt subsets from a configuration set.
409 /// For each configuration {@code c} in {@code configs}:
412 /// map[c] U= c.<seealso cref="ATNConfig#alt alt"/> # map hash/equals uses s and
417 static std::vector<antlrcpp::BitSet> getConflictingAltSubsets(ATNConfigSet *configs);
420 /// Get a map from state to alt subset from a configuration set. For each
421 /// configuration {@code c} in {@code configs}:
424 /// map[c.<seealso cref="ATNConfig#state state"/>] U= c.<seealso
425 /// cref="ATNConfig#alt alt"/>
428 static std::map<ATNState*, antlrcpp::BitSet> getStateToAltMap(ATNConfigSet *configs);
430 static bool hasStateAssociatedWithOneAlt(ATNConfigSet *configs);
432 static size_t getSingleViableAlt(const std::vector<antlrcpp::BitSet> &altsets);
436 } // namespace antlr4