They were a vestige of when Tree-sitter did sentential form-based
incremental parsing (as opposed to simply state matching). This was
elegant but not compatible with GLR as far as I could tell.
The previous approach to error recovery relied on special error-recovery
states in the parse table. For each token T, there was an error recovery
state in which the parser looked for *any* token that could follow T.
Unfortunately, sometimes the set of tokens that could follow T contained
conflicts. For example, in JS, the token '}' can be followed by the
open-ended 'template_chars' token, but also by ordinary tokens like
'identifier'. So with the old algorithm, when recovering from an
unexpected '}' token, the lexer had no way to distinguish identifiers
from template_chars.
This commit drops the error recovery states. Instead, when we encounter
an unexpected token T, we recover from the error by finding a previous
state S in the stack in which T would be valid, popping all of the nodes
after S, and wrapping them in an error.
This way, the lexer is always invoked in a normal parse state, in which
it is looking for a non-conflicting set of tokens. Eliminating the error
recovery states also shrinks the lex state machine significantly.
Signed-off-by: Rick Winfrey <rewinfrey@github.com>
We previously maintained a set of individual productions that were
involved in conflicts, but that was subtly incorrect because
we don't compare productions themselves when comparing parse items;
we only compare the parse items properties that could affect the
final reduce actions.
The current pretty conservative approach is to avoid merging parse states which
would cause a pair tokens to co-exist for the first time in any parse state,
where the two tokens can start with the same character and at least one of the
tokens can contain a character which is part of the grammar's separators.
* Remove remnants of templatized remove_duplicate_states function
* Rename recovery_tokens function to get_compatible_tokens and augment it
also compute pairs of tokens which could potentially be incompatible
* While generating the lex table, note which tokens can match the
same string. A token needs to be relexed when it has possible
homonyms in the current state.
* Also note which tokens can match substrings of each other tokens.
A token needs to be relexed when there are viable tokens that
could match longer strings in the current state and the next
token has been edited.
* Remove the logic for marking tokens as fragile on creation.
* Store the reusability/non-reusability of symbols off of individual
actions and onto the entire entry for the state & symbol.
* Use GLR stack-splitting to try all numbers of tokens to
discard until a repair is found.
* Check the validity of repairs by looking at the child trees,
rather than the statically-computed 'in-progress symbols' list
Suppose a parse state S has multiple actions for a terminal lookahead symbol A.
Then during incremental parsing, while in state S, the parser should not
reuse a non-terminal lookahead B where FIRST(B) contains A, because reusing B
might prematurely discard one of the possible actions that a batch parser
would have attempted in state S, upon seeing A as a lookahead.
This stores whether a symbol is only ever used as a ubiquitous token. This will
allow ubiquitous nodes to be reused more effectively: if they are always
ubiquitous, then they can be reused immediately, and otherwise, they must be
broken down in case they need to be used structurally.
