Parsing

Front-End: Parser
source tokens IR
scanner parser
code

errors

 Checks the stream of words

and their parts of speech for
grammatical correctness
2
Front-End: Parser
source tokens IR
scanner parser
code

errors

 Determines if the input is

syntactically well formed
3
Front-End: Parser
source tokens IR
scanner parser
code

errors

 Guides context-sensitive
(“semantic”) analysis (type
checking)
4
Front-End: Parser
source tokens IR
scanner parser
code

errors

 Builds IR for source program

5
Syntactic Analysis
 Natural language analogy:
consider the sentence
He wrote the program

6
Syntactic Analysis

He wrote the program

noun verb article noun

7
Syntactic Analysis

He wrote the program

noun verb article noun
subject predicate object

8
Syntactic Analysis
 Natural language analogy
He wrote the program
noun verb article noun
subject predicate object

sentence
9
Syntactic Analysis
 Programming language

if ( b <= 0 ) a = b
bool expr assignment

if-statement
10
Syntactic Analysis
syntax errors

int* foo(int i, int j))

{
for(k=0; i j; )
fi( i > j )
return j;
}
11
 Compiler
Construction
Sohail Aslam
Lecture 11
Syntactic Analysis
int* foo(int i, int j))
{ extra parenthesis
for(k=0; i j; )
fi( i > j ) Missing
return j; expression

} not a keyword
13
Semantic Analysis
 Grammatically correct

He wrote the computer

noun verb article noun
subject predicate object

sentence
14
Semantic Analysis
 semantically (meaning) wrong!

He wrote the computer

noun verb article noun
subject predicate object

sentence
15
Semantic Analysis
int* foo(int i, int j)
{
for(k=0; i < j; j++ )
if( i < j-2 )undeclared var
sum = sum+i
return type
return sum;
} mismatch
16
Role of the Parser
 Not all sequences of tokens
are program.
 Parser must distinguish
between valid and invalid
sequences of tokens.

17
Role of the Parser
 Not all sequences of tokens
are program.
 Parser must distinguish
between valid and invalid
sequences of tokens.

18
Role of the Parser
What we need
 An expressive way to
describe the syntax
 An acceptor mechanism that
determines if input token
stream satisfies the syntax
19
Role of the Parser
What we need
 An expressive way to
describe the syntax
 An acceptor mechanism that
determines if input token
stream satisfies the syntax
20
Role of the Parser
What we need
 An expressive way to
describe the syntax
 An acceptor mechanism that
determines if input token
stream satisfies the syntax
21
Study of Parsing
 Parsing is the process of
discovering a derivation for
some sentence

22
Study of Parsing
 Mathematical model of
syntax – a grammar G.
 Algortihm for testing
membership in L(G).

23
Study of Parsing
 Mathematical model of
syntax – a grammar G.
 Algortihm for testing
membership in L(G).

24
Context Free Grammars
A CFG is a four tuple
G=(S,N,T,P)
 S is the start symbol
 N is a set of non-terminals
 T is a set of terminals
 P is a set of productions
25
Why Not Regular
Expressions?
Reason:
regular languages do not
have enough power to
express syntax of
programming languages.
26
Limitations of Regular
Languages
 Finite automaton can’t
remember number of
times it has visited a
particular state
27
Example of CFG
 Context-free syntax is
specified with a CFG

28
Example of CFG
 Example

SheepNoise → SheepNoise baa

| baa

 This CFG defines the set of

noises sheep make
29
Example of CFG
 We can use the
SheepNoise grammar to
create sentences
 We use the productions as
rewriting rules

30
Example of CFG
SheepNoise → SheepNoise baa
| baa

Rule Sentential Form

- SheepNoise
2 baa
31
Example of CFG
SheepNoise → SheepNoise baa
| baa

Rule Sentential Form

- SheepNoise
1 SheepNoise baa
2 baa baa
32
Example of CFG
Rule Sentential Form
- SheepNoise
1 SheepNoise baa
1 SheepNoise baa baa
2 baa baa baa
And so on ...
33
Example of CFG
 While it is cute, this
example quickly runs out
intellectual steam
 To explore uses of CFGs,
we need a more complex
grammar
34
Example of CFG
 While it is cute, this
example quickly runs out
intellectual steam
 To explore uses of CFGs,
we need a more complex
grammar
35
More Useful Grammar
1 expr → expr op expr
2 | num
3 | id
4 op → +
5 | –
6 | *
7 | / 36
Backus-Naur Form (BNF)
 Grammar rules in a
similar form were first
used in the description of
the Algol60 Language.

37
Backus-Naur Form (BNF)
 The notation was developed
by John Backus and
adapted by Peter Naur for
the Algol60 report.
 Thus the term Backus-Naur
Form (BNF)
38
Backus-Naur Form (BNF)
 The notation was developed
by John Backus and
adapted by Peter Naur for
the Algol60 report.
 Thus the term Backus-Naur
Form (BNF)
39
Derivation:
 Let us use the expression
grammar to derive the
sentence

x–2*y

40
Derivation: x – 2 * y
Rule Sentential Form
- expr
1 expr op expr
2 <id,x> op expr
5 <id,x> – expr
1 <id,x> – expr op
expr
41
Derivation: x – 2 * y
Rule Sentential Form
2 <id,x> – <num,2> op
expr
6 <id,x> – <num,2> 
expr
3 <id,x> – <num,2> 
<id,y>
42
Derivation
 Such a process of rewrites
is called a derivation.
 Process or discovering a
derivations is called parsing

43
Derivation
 Such a process of rewrites
is called a derivation.
 Process or discovering a
derivations is called parsing

44
Derivation

We denote this derivation as:

expr →* id – num * id

45
Derivations
 At each step, we choose a
non-terminal to replace
 Different choices can lead to
different derivations.

46
Derivations
 At each step, we choose a
non-terminal to replace
 Different choices can lead to
different derivations.

47
Derivations
 Two derivations are of
interest
1. Leftmost derivation
2. Rightmost derivation

48
Derivations
 Leftmost derivation:
replace leftmost non-
terminal (NT) at each step
 Rightmost derivation:
replace rightmost NT at
each step
49
Derivations
 Leftmost derivation:
replace leftmost non-
terminal (NT) at each step
 Rightmost derivation:
replace rightmost NT at
each step
50
Derivations
 The example on the
preceding slides was
leftmost derivation
 There is also a rightmost
derivation

51
Rightmost Derivation
Rule Sentential Form
- expr
1 expr op expr
3 expr op <id,x>
6 expr  <id,x>
1 expr op expr 
<id,x>
52
Derivation: x – 2 * y
Rule Sentential Form
2 expr op <num,2> 
<id,x>
5 expr – <num,2> 
<id,x>
3 <id,x> – <num,2> 
<id,y> 53
Derivations
 In both cases we have

expr →* id – num  id

54
Derivations
 The two derivations produce
different parse trees.
 The parse trees imply
different evaluation orders!

55
Derivations
 The two derivations produce
different parse trees.
 The parse trees imply
different evaluation orders!

56