nix-super/src/libexpr/parser.y

517 lines
16 KiB
Text
Raw Normal View History

%glr-parser
2019-10-09 23:57:37 +03:00
%define api.pure
%locations
2019-03-27 22:09:31 +02:00
%define parse.error verbose
2006-10-02 17:43:15 +03:00
%defines
/* %no-lines */
2013-03-14 19:31:08 +02:00
%parse-param { void * scanner }
%parse-param { nix::ParserState * state }
2013-03-14 19:31:08 +02:00
%lex-param { void * scanner }
%lex-param { nix::ParserState * state }
2012-04-13 15:28:26 +03:00
%expect 1
%expect-rr 1
%code requires {
2013-09-02 17:29:15 +03:00
#ifndef BISON_HEADER
#define BISON_HEADER
2013-09-02 17:29:15 +03:00
2022-01-19 14:39:42 +02:00
#include <variant>
#include "finally.hh"
#include "util.hh"
#include "users.hh"
2013-09-02 17:29:15 +03:00
#include "nixexpr.hh"
#include "eval.hh"
#include "eval-settings.hh"
#include "parser-state.hh"
#define YYLTYPE ::nix::ParserLocation
#define YY_DECL int yylex \
(YYSTYPE * yylval_param, YYLTYPE * yylloc_param, yyscan_t yyscanner, nix::ParserState * state)
// For efficiency, we only track offsets; not line,column coordinates
# define YYLLOC_DEFAULT(Current, Rhs, N) \
do \
if (N) \
{ \
(Current).beginOffset = YYRHSLOC (Rhs, 1).beginOffset; \
(Current).endOffset = YYRHSLOC (Rhs, N).endOffset; \
} \
else \
{ \
(Current).beginOffset = (Current).endOffset = \
YYRHSLOC (Rhs, 0).endOffset; \
} \
while (0)
namespace nix {
2024-07-09 20:25:45 +03:00
typedef std::map<PosIdx, DocComment> DocCommentMap;
Expr * parseExprFromBuf(
char * text,
size_t length,
Pos::Origin origin,
const SourcePath & basePath,
SymbolTable & symbols,
const EvalSettings & settings,
PosTable & positions,
2024-07-09 20:25:45 +03:00
DocCommentMap & docComments,
const ref<SourceAccessor> rootFS,
const Expr::AstSymbols & astSymbols);
}
#endif
}
%{
#include "parser-tab.hh"
#include "lexer-tab.hh"
YY_DECL;
using namespace nix;
#define CUR_POS state->at(*yylocp)
void yyerror(YYLTYPE * loc, yyscan_t scanner, ParserState * state, const char * error)
{
if (std::string_view(error).starts_with("syntax error, unexpected end of file")) {
loc->beginOffset = loc->endOffset;
}
throw ParseError({
2024-02-04 06:35:19 +02:00
.msg = HintFmt(error),
.pos = state->positions[state->at(*loc)]
});
}
#define SET_DOC_POS(lambda, pos) setDocPosition(state->lexerState, lambda, state->at(pos))
static void setDocPosition(const LexerState & lexerState, ExprLambda * lambda, PosIdx start) {
auto it = lexerState.positionToDocComment.find(start);
if (it != lexerState.positionToDocComment.end()) {
lambda->setDocComment(it->second);
}
}
%}
%union {
2013-09-02 17:29:15 +03:00
// !!! We're probably leaking stuff here.
nix::Expr * e;
nix::ExprList * list;
nix::ExprAttrs * attrs;
nix::Formals * formals;
nix::Formal * formal;
nix::NixInt n;
nix::NixFloat nf;
nix::StringToken id; // !!! -> Symbol
nix::StringToken path;
nix::StringToken uri;
nix::StringToken str;
std::vector<nix::AttrName> * attrNames;
std::vector<std::pair<nix::AttrName, nix::PosIdx>> * inheritAttrs;
2022-05-25 16:49:41 +03:00
std::vector<std::pair<nix::PosIdx, nix::Expr *>> * string_parts;
std::vector<std::pair<nix::PosIdx, std::variant<nix::Expr *, nix::StringToken>>> * ind_string_parts;
}
%type <e> start expr expr_function expr_if expr_op
%type <e> expr_select expr_simple expr_app
%type <list> expr_list
%type <attrs> binds
%type <formals> formals
%type <formal> formal
%type <attrNames> attrpath
%type <inheritAttrs> attrs
2022-01-19 14:39:42 +02:00
%type <string_parts> string_parts_interpolated
%type <ind_string_parts> ind_string_parts
2021-07-29 19:03:07 +03:00
%type <e> path_start string_parts string_attr
%type <id> attr
%token <id> ID
2022-01-19 14:39:42 +02:00
%token <str> STR IND_STR
%token <n> INT_LIT
%token <nf> FLOAT_LIT
2021-07-29 19:03:07 +03:00
%token <path> PATH HPATH SPATH PATH_END
%token <uri> URI
%token IF THEN ELSE ASSERT WITH LET IN_KW REC INHERIT EQ NEQ AND OR IMPL OR_KW
%token DOLLAR_CURLY /* == ${ */
%token IND_STRING_OPEN IND_STRING_CLOSE
%token ELLIPSIS
2018-07-23 10:28:48 +03:00
%right IMPL
%left OR
%left AND
%nonassoc EQ NEQ
%nonassoc '<' '>' LEQ GEQ
%right UPDATE
%left NOT
%left '+' '-'
%left '*' '/'
%right CONCAT
%nonassoc '?'
%nonassoc NEGATE
%%
start: expr { state->result = $1; };
expr: expr_function;
expr_function
: ID ':' expr_function
{ auto me = new ExprLambda(CUR_POS, state->symbols.create($1), 0, $3);
$$ = me;
SET_DOC_POS(me, @1);
}
| '{' formals '}' ':' expr_function
{ auto me = new ExprLambda(CUR_POS, state->validateFormals($2), $5);
$$ = me;
SET_DOC_POS(me, @1);
}
| '{' formals '}' '@' ID ':' expr_function
defer formals duplicate check for incresed efficiency all round if we defer the duplicate argument check for lambda formals we can use more efficient data structures for the formals set, and we can get rid of the duplication of formals names to boot. instead of a list of formals we've seen and a set of names we'll keep a vector instead and run a sort+dupcheck step before moving the parsed formals into a newly created lambda. this improves performance on search and rebuild by ~1%, pure parsing gains more (about 4%). this does reorder lambda arguments in the xml output, but the output is still stable. this shouldn't be a problem since argument order is not semantically important anyway. before nix search --no-eval-cache --offline ../nixpkgs hello Time (mean ± σ): 8.550 s ± 0.060 s [User: 6.470 s, System: 1.664 s] Range (min … max): 8.435 s … 8.666 s 20 runs nix eval -f ../nixpkgs/pkgs/development/haskell-modules/hackage-packages.nix Time (mean ± σ): 346.7 ms ± 2.1 ms [User: 312.4 ms, System: 34.2 ms] Range (min … max): 343.8 ms … 353.4 ms 20 runs nix eval --raw --impure --expr 'with import <nixpkgs/nixos> {}; system' Time (mean ± σ): 2.720 s ± 0.031 s [User: 2.415 s, System: 0.231 s] Range (min … max): 2.662 s … 2.780 s 20 runs after nix search --no-eval-cache --offline ../nixpkgs hello Time (mean ± σ): 8.462 s ± 0.063 s [User: 6.398 s, System: 1.661 s] Range (min … max): 8.339 s … 8.542 s 20 runs nix eval -f ../nixpkgs/pkgs/development/haskell-modules/hackage-packages.nix Time (mean ± σ): 329.1 ms ± 1.4 ms [User: 296.8 ms, System: 32.3 ms] Range (min … max): 326.1 ms … 330.8 ms 20 runs nix eval --raw --impure --expr 'with import <nixpkgs/nixos> {}; system' Time (mean ± σ): 2.687 s ± 0.035 s [User: 2.392 s, System: 0.228 s] Range (min … max): 2.626 s … 2.754 s 20 runs
2022-01-19 17:49:02 +02:00
{
auto arg = state->symbols.create($5);
auto me = new ExprLambda(CUR_POS, arg, state->validateFormals($2, CUR_POS, arg), $7);
$$ = me;
SET_DOC_POS(me, @1);
defer formals duplicate check for incresed efficiency all round if we defer the duplicate argument check for lambda formals we can use more efficient data structures for the formals set, and we can get rid of the duplication of formals names to boot. instead of a list of formals we've seen and a set of names we'll keep a vector instead and run a sort+dupcheck step before moving the parsed formals into a newly created lambda. this improves performance on search and rebuild by ~1%, pure parsing gains more (about 4%). this does reorder lambda arguments in the xml output, but the output is still stable. this shouldn't be a problem since argument order is not semantically important anyway. before nix search --no-eval-cache --offline ../nixpkgs hello Time (mean ± σ): 8.550 s ± 0.060 s [User: 6.470 s, System: 1.664 s] Range (min … max): 8.435 s … 8.666 s 20 runs nix eval -f ../nixpkgs/pkgs/development/haskell-modules/hackage-packages.nix Time (mean ± σ): 346.7 ms ± 2.1 ms [User: 312.4 ms, System: 34.2 ms] Range (min … max): 343.8 ms … 353.4 ms 20 runs nix eval --raw --impure --expr 'with import <nixpkgs/nixos> {}; system' Time (mean ± σ): 2.720 s ± 0.031 s [User: 2.415 s, System: 0.231 s] Range (min … max): 2.662 s … 2.780 s 20 runs after nix search --no-eval-cache --offline ../nixpkgs hello Time (mean ± σ): 8.462 s ± 0.063 s [User: 6.398 s, System: 1.661 s] Range (min … max): 8.339 s … 8.542 s 20 runs nix eval -f ../nixpkgs/pkgs/development/haskell-modules/hackage-packages.nix Time (mean ± σ): 329.1 ms ± 1.4 ms [User: 296.8 ms, System: 32.3 ms] Range (min … max): 326.1 ms … 330.8 ms 20 runs nix eval --raw --impure --expr 'with import <nixpkgs/nixos> {}; system' Time (mean ± σ): 2.687 s ± 0.035 s [User: 2.392 s, System: 0.228 s] Range (min … max): 2.626 s … 2.754 s 20 runs
2022-01-19 17:49:02 +02:00
}
| ID '@' '{' formals '}' ':' expr_function
defer formals duplicate check for incresed efficiency all round if we defer the duplicate argument check for lambda formals we can use more efficient data structures for the formals set, and we can get rid of the duplication of formals names to boot. instead of a list of formals we've seen and a set of names we'll keep a vector instead and run a sort+dupcheck step before moving the parsed formals into a newly created lambda. this improves performance on search and rebuild by ~1%, pure parsing gains more (about 4%). this does reorder lambda arguments in the xml output, but the output is still stable. this shouldn't be a problem since argument order is not semantically important anyway. before nix search --no-eval-cache --offline ../nixpkgs hello Time (mean ± σ): 8.550 s ± 0.060 s [User: 6.470 s, System: 1.664 s] Range (min … max): 8.435 s … 8.666 s 20 runs nix eval -f ../nixpkgs/pkgs/development/haskell-modules/hackage-packages.nix Time (mean ± σ): 346.7 ms ± 2.1 ms [User: 312.4 ms, System: 34.2 ms] Range (min … max): 343.8 ms … 353.4 ms 20 runs nix eval --raw --impure --expr 'with import <nixpkgs/nixos> {}; system' Time (mean ± σ): 2.720 s ± 0.031 s [User: 2.415 s, System: 0.231 s] Range (min … max): 2.662 s … 2.780 s 20 runs after nix search --no-eval-cache --offline ../nixpkgs hello Time (mean ± σ): 8.462 s ± 0.063 s [User: 6.398 s, System: 1.661 s] Range (min … max): 8.339 s … 8.542 s 20 runs nix eval -f ../nixpkgs/pkgs/development/haskell-modules/hackage-packages.nix Time (mean ± σ): 329.1 ms ± 1.4 ms [User: 296.8 ms, System: 32.3 ms] Range (min … max): 326.1 ms … 330.8 ms 20 runs nix eval --raw --impure --expr 'with import <nixpkgs/nixos> {}; system' Time (mean ± σ): 2.687 s ± 0.035 s [User: 2.392 s, System: 0.228 s] Range (min … max): 2.626 s … 2.754 s 20 runs
2022-01-19 17:49:02 +02:00
{
auto arg = state->symbols.create($1);
auto me = new ExprLambda(CUR_POS, arg, state->validateFormals($4, CUR_POS, arg), $7);
$$ = me;
SET_DOC_POS(me, @1);
defer formals duplicate check for incresed efficiency all round if we defer the duplicate argument check for lambda formals we can use more efficient data structures for the formals set, and we can get rid of the duplication of formals names to boot. instead of a list of formals we've seen and a set of names we'll keep a vector instead and run a sort+dupcheck step before moving the parsed formals into a newly created lambda. this improves performance on search and rebuild by ~1%, pure parsing gains more (about 4%). this does reorder lambda arguments in the xml output, but the output is still stable. this shouldn't be a problem since argument order is not semantically important anyway. before nix search --no-eval-cache --offline ../nixpkgs hello Time (mean ± σ): 8.550 s ± 0.060 s [User: 6.470 s, System: 1.664 s] Range (min … max): 8.435 s … 8.666 s 20 runs nix eval -f ../nixpkgs/pkgs/development/haskell-modules/hackage-packages.nix Time (mean ± σ): 346.7 ms ± 2.1 ms [User: 312.4 ms, System: 34.2 ms] Range (min … max): 343.8 ms … 353.4 ms 20 runs nix eval --raw --impure --expr 'with import <nixpkgs/nixos> {}; system' Time (mean ± σ): 2.720 s ± 0.031 s [User: 2.415 s, System: 0.231 s] Range (min … max): 2.662 s … 2.780 s 20 runs after nix search --no-eval-cache --offline ../nixpkgs hello Time (mean ± σ): 8.462 s ± 0.063 s [User: 6.398 s, System: 1.661 s] Range (min … max): 8.339 s … 8.542 s 20 runs nix eval -f ../nixpkgs/pkgs/development/haskell-modules/hackage-packages.nix Time (mean ± σ): 329.1 ms ± 1.4 ms [User: 296.8 ms, System: 32.3 ms] Range (min … max): 326.1 ms … 330.8 ms 20 runs nix eval --raw --impure --expr 'with import <nixpkgs/nixos> {}; system' Time (mean ± σ): 2.687 s ± 0.035 s [User: 2.392 s, System: 0.228 s] Range (min … max): 2.626 s … 2.754 s 20 runs
2022-01-19 17:49:02 +02:00
}
2010-04-13 00:21:24 +03:00
| ASSERT expr ';' expr_function
{ $$ = new ExprAssert(CUR_POS, $2, $4); }
| WITH expr ';' expr_function
{ $$ = new ExprWith(CUR_POS, $2, $4); }
| LET binds IN_KW expr_function
Dynamic attrs This adds new syntax for attribute names: * attrs."${name}" => getAttr name attrs * attrs ? "${name}" => isAttrs attrs && hasAttr attrs name * attrs."${name}" or def => if attrs ? "${name}" then attrs."${name}" else def * { "${name}" = value; } => listToAttrs [{ inherit name value; }] Of course, it's a bit more complicated than that. The attribute chains can be arbitrarily long and contain combinations of static and dynamic parts (e.g. attrs."${foo}".bar."${baz}" or qux), which is relatively straightforward for the getAttrs/hasAttrs cases but is more complex for the listToAttrs case due to rules about duplicate attribute definitions. For attribute sets with dynamic attribute names, duplicate static attributes are detected at parse time while duplicate dynamic attributes are detected when the attribute set is forced. So, for example, { a = null; a.b = null; "${"c"}" = true; } will be a parse-time error, while { a = {}; "${"a"}".b = null; c = true; } will be an eval-time error (technically that case could theoretically be detected at parse time, but the general case would require full evaluation). Moreover, duplicate dynamic attributes are not allowed even in cases where they would be with static attributes ({ a.b.d = true; a.b.c = false; } is legal, but { a."${"b"}".d = true; a."${"b"}".c = false; } is not). This restriction might be relaxed in the future in cases where the static variant would not be an error, but it is not obvious that that is desirable. Finally, recursive attribute sets with dynamic attributes have the static attributes in scope but not the dynamic ones. So rec { a = true; "${"b"}" = a; } is equivalent to { a = true; b = true; } but rec { "${"a"}" = true; b = a; } would be an error or use a from the surrounding scope if it exists. Note that the getAttr, getAttr or default, and hasAttr are all implemented purely in the parser as syntactic sugar, while attribute sets with dynamic attribute names required changes to the AST to be implemented cleanly. This is an alternative solution to and closes #167 Signed-off-by: Shea Levy <shea@shealevy.com>
2013-09-21 06:25:30 +03:00
{ if (!$2->dynamicAttrs.empty())
throw ParseError({
2024-02-04 06:35:19 +02:00
.msg = HintFmt("dynamic attributes not allowed in let"),
.pos = state->positions[CUR_POS]
});
Dynamic attrs This adds new syntax for attribute names: * attrs."${name}" => getAttr name attrs * attrs ? "${name}" => isAttrs attrs && hasAttr attrs name * attrs."${name}" or def => if attrs ? "${name}" then attrs."${name}" else def * { "${name}" = value; } => listToAttrs [{ inherit name value; }] Of course, it's a bit more complicated than that. The attribute chains can be arbitrarily long and contain combinations of static and dynamic parts (e.g. attrs."${foo}".bar."${baz}" or qux), which is relatively straightforward for the getAttrs/hasAttrs cases but is more complex for the listToAttrs case due to rules about duplicate attribute definitions. For attribute sets with dynamic attribute names, duplicate static attributes are detected at parse time while duplicate dynamic attributes are detected when the attribute set is forced. So, for example, { a = null; a.b = null; "${"c"}" = true; } will be a parse-time error, while { a = {}; "${"a"}".b = null; c = true; } will be an eval-time error (technically that case could theoretically be detected at parse time, but the general case would require full evaluation). Moreover, duplicate dynamic attributes are not allowed even in cases where they would be with static attributes ({ a.b.d = true; a.b.c = false; } is legal, but { a."${"b"}".d = true; a."${"b"}".c = false; } is not). This restriction might be relaxed in the future in cases where the static variant would not be an error, but it is not obvious that that is desirable. Finally, recursive attribute sets with dynamic attributes have the static attributes in scope but not the dynamic ones. So rec { a = true; "${"b"}" = a; } is equivalent to { a = true; b = true; } but rec { "${"a"}" = true; b = a; } would be an error or use a from the surrounding scope if it exists. Note that the getAttr, getAttr or default, and hasAttr are all implemented purely in the parser as syntactic sugar, while attribute sets with dynamic attribute names required changes to the AST to be implemented cleanly. This is an alternative solution to and closes #167 Signed-off-by: Shea Levy <shea@shealevy.com>
2013-09-21 06:25:30 +03:00
$$ = new ExprLet($2, $4);
}
| expr_if
;
expr_if
2022-10-20 14:55:15 +03:00
: IF expr THEN expr ELSE expr { $$ = new ExprIf(CUR_POS, $2, $4, $6); }
| expr_op
;
expr_op
: '!' expr_op %prec NOT { $$ = new ExprOpNot($2); }
| '-' expr_op %prec NEGATE { $$ = new ExprCall(CUR_POS, new ExprVar(state->s.sub), {new ExprInt(0), $2}); }
2010-04-13 00:21:24 +03:00
| expr_op EQ expr_op { $$ = new ExprOpEq($1, $3); }
| expr_op NEQ expr_op { $$ = new ExprOpNEq($1, $3); }
| expr_op '<' expr_op { $$ = new ExprCall(state->at(@2), new ExprVar(state->s.lessThan), {$1, $3}); }
| expr_op LEQ expr_op { $$ = new ExprOpNot(new ExprCall(state->at(@2), new ExprVar(state->s.lessThan), {$3, $1})); }
| expr_op '>' expr_op { $$ = new ExprCall(state->at(@2), new ExprVar(state->s.lessThan), {$3, $1}); }
| expr_op GEQ expr_op { $$ = new ExprOpNot(new ExprCall(state->at(@2), new ExprVar(state->s.lessThan), {$1, $3})); }
| expr_op AND expr_op { $$ = new ExprOpAnd(state->at(@2), $1, $3); }
| expr_op OR expr_op { $$ = new ExprOpOr(state->at(@2), $1, $3); }
| expr_op IMPL expr_op { $$ = new ExprOpImpl(state->at(@2), $1, $3); }
| expr_op UPDATE expr_op { $$ = new ExprOpUpdate(state->at(@2), $1, $3); }
| expr_op '?' attrpath { $$ = new ExprOpHasAttr($1, std::move(*$3)); delete $3; }
2010-04-13 00:21:24 +03:00
| expr_op '+' expr_op
{ $$ = new ExprConcatStrings(state->at(@2), false, new std::vector<std::pair<PosIdx, Expr *> >({{state->at(@1), $1}, {state->at(@3), $3}})); }
| expr_op '-' expr_op { $$ = new ExprCall(state->at(@2), new ExprVar(state->s.sub), {$1, $3}); }
| expr_op '*' expr_op { $$ = new ExprCall(state->at(@2), new ExprVar(state->s.mul), {$1, $3}); }
| expr_op '/' expr_op { $$ = new ExprCall(state->at(@2), new ExprVar(state->s.div), {$1, $3}); }
| expr_op CONCAT expr_op { $$ = new ExprOpConcatLists(state->at(@2), $1, $3); }
| expr_app
;
expr_app
: expr_app expr_select {
if (auto e2 = dynamic_cast<ExprCall *>($1)) {
e2->args.push_back($2);
$$ = $1;
} else
$$ = new ExprCall(CUR_POS, $1, {$2});
}
| expr_select
;
expr_select
: expr_simple '.' attrpath
{ $$ = new ExprSelect(CUR_POS, $1, std::move(*$3), nullptr); delete $3; }
| expr_simple '.' attrpath OR_KW expr_select
{ $$ = new ExprSelect(CUR_POS, $1, std::move(*$3), $5); delete $3; }
| /* Backwards compatibility: because Nixpkgs has a rarely used
function named or, allow stuff like map or [...]. */
expr_simple OR_KW
{ $$ = new ExprCall(CUR_POS, $1, {new ExprVar(CUR_POS, state->s.or_)}); }
2023-02-12 06:45:25 +02:00
| expr_simple
;
expr_simple
: ID {
std::string_view s = "__curPos";
if ($1.l == s.size() && strncmp($1.p, s.data(), s.size()) == 0)
$$ = new ExprPos(CUR_POS);
else
$$ = new ExprVar(CUR_POS, state->symbols.create($1));
}
| INT_LIT { $$ = new ExprInt($1); }
| FLOAT_LIT { $$ = new ExprFloat($1); }
Dynamic attrs This adds new syntax for attribute names: * attrs."${name}" => getAttr name attrs * attrs ? "${name}" => isAttrs attrs && hasAttr attrs name * attrs."${name}" or def => if attrs ? "${name}" then attrs."${name}" else def * { "${name}" = value; } => listToAttrs [{ inherit name value; }] Of course, it's a bit more complicated than that. The attribute chains can be arbitrarily long and contain combinations of static and dynamic parts (e.g. attrs."${foo}".bar."${baz}" or qux), which is relatively straightforward for the getAttrs/hasAttrs cases but is more complex for the listToAttrs case due to rules about duplicate attribute definitions. For attribute sets with dynamic attribute names, duplicate static attributes are detected at parse time while duplicate dynamic attributes are detected when the attribute set is forced. So, for example, { a = null; a.b = null; "${"c"}" = true; } will be a parse-time error, while { a = {}; "${"a"}".b = null; c = true; } will be an eval-time error (technically that case could theoretically be detected at parse time, but the general case would require full evaluation). Moreover, duplicate dynamic attributes are not allowed even in cases where they would be with static attributes ({ a.b.d = true; a.b.c = false; } is legal, but { a."${"b"}".d = true; a."${"b"}".c = false; } is not). This restriction might be relaxed in the future in cases where the static variant would not be an error, but it is not obvious that that is desirable. Finally, recursive attribute sets with dynamic attributes have the static attributes in scope but not the dynamic ones. So rec { a = true; "${"b"}" = a; } is equivalent to { a = true; b = true; } but rec { "${"a"}" = true; b = a; } would be an error or use a from the surrounding scope if it exists. Note that the getAttr, getAttr or default, and hasAttr are all implemented purely in the parser as syntactic sugar, while attribute sets with dynamic attribute names required changes to the AST to be implemented cleanly. This is an alternative solution to and closes #167 Signed-off-by: Shea Levy <shea@shealevy.com>
2013-09-21 06:25:30 +03:00
| '"' string_parts '"' { $$ = $2; }
| IND_STRING_OPEN ind_string_parts IND_STRING_CLOSE {
$$ = state->stripIndentation(CUR_POS, std::move(*$2));
delete $2;
}
2023-02-12 06:45:25 +02:00
| path_start PATH_END
2021-07-29 19:03:07 +03:00
| path_start string_parts_interpolated PATH_END {
$2->insert($2->begin(), {state->at(@1), $1});
2021-07-29 19:03:07 +03:00
$$ = new ExprConcatStrings(CUR_POS, false, $2);
}
| SPATH {
std::string path($1.p + 1, $1.l - 2);
$$ = new ExprCall(CUR_POS,
new ExprVar(state->s.findFile),
{new ExprVar(state->s.nixPath),
2023-02-11 01:34:31 +02:00
new ExprString(std::move(path))});
}
| URI {
static bool noURLLiterals = experimentalFeatureSettings.isEnabled(Xp::NoUrlLiterals);
if (noURLLiterals)
throw ParseError({
2024-02-04 06:35:19 +02:00
.msg = HintFmt("URL literals are disabled"),
.pos = state->positions[CUR_POS]
});
$$ = new ExprString(std::string($1));
}
| '(' expr ')' { $$ = $2; }
/* Let expressions `let {..., body = ...}' are just desugared
2010-04-13 00:21:24 +03:00
into `(rec {..., body = ...}).body'. */
| LET '{' binds '}'
{ $3->recursive = true; $$ = new ExprSelect(noPos, $3, state->s.body); }
| REC '{' binds '}'
2010-04-13 02:33:23 +03:00
{ $3->recursive = true; $$ = $3; }
| '{' binds '}'
2010-04-13 02:33:23 +03:00
{ $$ = $2; }
| '[' expr_list ']' { $$ = $2; }
;
string_parts
: STR { $$ = new ExprString(std::string($1)); }
| string_parts_interpolated { $$ = new ExprConcatStrings(CUR_POS, true, $1); }
don't use Symbols for strings string expressions by and large do not need the benefits a Symbol gives us, instead they pollute the symbol table and cause unnecessary overhead for almost all strings. the one place we can think of that benefits from them (attrpaths with expressions) extracts the benefit in the parser, which we'll have to touch anyway when changing ExprString to hold strings. this gives a sizeable improvement on of 3-5% on all benchmarks we've run. before nix search --no-eval-cache --offline ../nixpkgs hello Time (mean ± σ): 8.844 s ± 0.045 s [User: 6.750 s, System: 1.663 s] Range (min … max): 8.758 s … 8.922 s 20 runs nix eval -f ../nixpkgs/pkgs/development/haskell-modules/hackage-packages.nix Time (mean ± σ): 367.4 ms ± 3.3 ms [User: 332.3 ms, System: 35.2 ms] Range (min … max): 364.0 ms … 375.2 ms 20 runs nix eval --raw --impure --expr 'with import <nixpkgs/nixos> {}; system' Time (mean ± σ): 2.810 s ± 0.030 s [User: 2.517 s, System: 0.225 s] Range (min … max): 2.742 s … 2.854 s 20 runs after nix search --no-eval-cache --offline ../nixpkgs hello Time (mean ± σ): 8.533 s ± 0.068 s [User: 6.485 s, System: 1.642 s] Range (min … max): 8.404 s … 8.657 s 20 runs nix eval -f ../nixpkgs/pkgs/development/haskell-modules/hackage-packages.nix Time (mean ± σ): 347.6 ms ± 3.1 ms [User: 313.1 ms, System: 34.5 ms] Range (min … max): 343.3 ms … 354.6 ms 20 runs nix eval --raw --impure --expr 'with import <nixpkgs/nixos> {}; system' Time (mean ± σ): 2.709 s ± 0.032 s [User: 2.414 s, System: 0.232 s] Range (min … max): 2.655 s … 2.788 s 20 runs
2022-01-19 15:31:30 +02:00
| { $$ = new ExprString(""); }
Dynamic attrs This adds new syntax for attribute names: * attrs."${name}" => getAttr name attrs * attrs ? "${name}" => isAttrs attrs && hasAttr attrs name * attrs."${name}" or def => if attrs ? "${name}" then attrs."${name}" else def * { "${name}" = value; } => listToAttrs [{ inherit name value; }] Of course, it's a bit more complicated than that. The attribute chains can be arbitrarily long and contain combinations of static and dynamic parts (e.g. attrs."${foo}".bar."${baz}" or qux), which is relatively straightforward for the getAttrs/hasAttrs cases but is more complex for the listToAttrs case due to rules about duplicate attribute definitions. For attribute sets with dynamic attribute names, duplicate static attributes are detected at parse time while duplicate dynamic attributes are detected when the attribute set is forced. So, for example, { a = null; a.b = null; "${"c"}" = true; } will be a parse-time error, while { a = {}; "${"a"}".b = null; c = true; } will be an eval-time error (technically that case could theoretically be detected at parse time, but the general case would require full evaluation). Moreover, duplicate dynamic attributes are not allowed even in cases where they would be with static attributes ({ a.b.d = true; a.b.c = false; } is legal, but { a."${"b"}".d = true; a."${"b"}".c = false; } is not). This restriction might be relaxed in the future in cases where the static variant would not be an error, but it is not obvious that that is desirable. Finally, recursive attribute sets with dynamic attributes have the static attributes in scope but not the dynamic ones. So rec { a = true; "${"b"}" = a; } is equivalent to { a = true; b = true; } but rec { "${"a"}" = true; b = a; } would be an error or use a from the surrounding scope if it exists. Note that the getAttr, getAttr or default, and hasAttr are all implemented purely in the parser as syntactic sugar, while attribute sets with dynamic attribute names required changes to the AST to be implemented cleanly. This is an alternative solution to and closes #167 Signed-off-by: Shea Levy <shea@shealevy.com>
2013-09-21 06:25:30 +03:00
;
string_parts_interpolated
2022-01-19 14:39:42 +02:00
: string_parts_interpolated STR
{ $$ = $1; $1->emplace_back(state->at(@2), new ExprString(std::string($2))); }
| string_parts_interpolated DOLLAR_CURLY expr '}' { $$ = $1; $1->emplace_back(state->at(@2), $3); }
| DOLLAR_CURLY expr '}' { $$ = new std::vector<std::pair<PosIdx, Expr *>>; $$->emplace_back(state->at(@1), $2); }
| STR DOLLAR_CURLY expr '}' {
2022-05-25 16:49:41 +03:00
$$ = new std::vector<std::pair<PosIdx, Expr *>>;
$$->emplace_back(state->at(@1), new ExprString(std::string($1)));
$$->emplace_back(state->at(@2), $3);
Dynamic attrs This adds new syntax for attribute names: * attrs."${name}" => getAttr name attrs * attrs ? "${name}" => isAttrs attrs && hasAttr attrs name * attrs."${name}" or def => if attrs ? "${name}" then attrs."${name}" else def * { "${name}" = value; } => listToAttrs [{ inherit name value; }] Of course, it's a bit more complicated than that. The attribute chains can be arbitrarily long and contain combinations of static and dynamic parts (e.g. attrs."${foo}".bar."${baz}" or qux), which is relatively straightforward for the getAttrs/hasAttrs cases but is more complex for the listToAttrs case due to rules about duplicate attribute definitions. For attribute sets with dynamic attribute names, duplicate static attributes are detected at parse time while duplicate dynamic attributes are detected when the attribute set is forced. So, for example, { a = null; a.b = null; "${"c"}" = true; } will be a parse-time error, while { a = {}; "${"a"}".b = null; c = true; } will be an eval-time error (technically that case could theoretically be detected at parse time, but the general case would require full evaluation). Moreover, duplicate dynamic attributes are not allowed even in cases where they would be with static attributes ({ a.b.d = true; a.b.c = false; } is legal, but { a."${"b"}".d = true; a."${"b"}".c = false; } is not). This restriction might be relaxed in the future in cases where the static variant would not be an error, but it is not obvious that that is desirable. Finally, recursive attribute sets with dynamic attributes have the static attributes in scope but not the dynamic ones. So rec { a = true; "${"b"}" = a; } is equivalent to { a = true; b = true; } but rec { "${"a"}" = true; b = a; } would be an error or use a from the surrounding scope if it exists. Note that the getAttr, getAttr or default, and hasAttr are all implemented purely in the parser as syntactic sugar, while attribute sets with dynamic attribute names required changes to the AST to be implemented cleanly. This is an alternative solution to and closes #167 Signed-off-by: Shea Levy <shea@shealevy.com>
2013-09-21 06:25:30 +03:00
}
;
2021-07-29 19:03:07 +03:00
path_start
: PATH {
Path path(absPath({$1.p, $1.l}, state->basePath.path.abs()));
2021-07-29 19:03:07 +03:00
/* add back in the trailing '/' to the first segment */
if ($1.p[$1.l-1] == '/' && $1.l > 1)
2021-07-29 19:03:07 +03:00
path += "/";
$$ = new ExprPath(ref<SourceAccessor>(state->rootFS), std::move(path));
2021-07-29 19:03:07 +03:00
}
| HPATH {
if (state->settings.pureEval) {
throw Error(
"the path '%s' can not be resolved in pure mode",
std::string_view($1.p, $1.l)
);
}
Path path(getHome() + std::string($1.p + 1, $1.l - 1));
$$ = new ExprPath(ref<SourceAccessor>(state->rootFS), std::move(path));
2021-07-29 19:03:07 +03:00
}
;
ind_string_parts
: ind_string_parts IND_STR { $$ = $1; $1->emplace_back(state->at(@2), $2); }
| ind_string_parts DOLLAR_CURLY expr '}' { $$ = $1; $1->emplace_back(state->at(@2), $3); }
2022-05-25 16:49:41 +03:00
| { $$ = new std::vector<std::pair<PosIdx, std::variant<Expr *, StringToken>>>; }
;
binds
: binds attrpath '=' expr ';' {
$$ = $1;
auto pos = state->at(@2);
2024-07-09 20:25:45 +03:00
auto exprPos = state->at(@4);
{
auto it = state->lexerState.positionToDocComment.find(pos);
if (it != state->lexerState.positionToDocComment.end()) {
$4->setDocComment(it->second);
2024-07-09 20:25:45 +03:00
state->lexerState.positionToDocComment.emplace(exprPos, it->second);
}
}
state->addAttr($$, std::move(*$2), $4, pos);
delete $2;
}
| binds INHERIT attrs ';'
{ $$ = $1;
for (auto & [i, iPos] : *$3) {
2015-07-17 20:24:28 +03:00
if ($$->attrs.find(i.symbol) != $$->attrs.end())
state->dupAttr(i.symbol, iPos, $$->attrs[i.symbol].pos);
$$->attrs.emplace(
i.symbol,
ExprAttrs::AttrDef(new ExprVar(iPos, i.symbol), iPos, ExprAttrs::AttrDef::Kind::Inherited));
}
delete $3;
}
| binds INHERIT '(' expr ')' attrs ';'
{ $$ = $1;
if (!$$->inheritFromExprs)
$$->inheritFromExprs = std::make_unique<std::vector<Expr *>>();
$$->inheritFromExprs->push_back($4);
auto from = new nix::ExprInheritFrom(state->at(@4), $$->inheritFromExprs->size() - 1);
for (auto & [i, iPos] : *$6) {
2015-07-17 20:24:28 +03:00
if ($$->attrs.find(i.symbol) != $$->attrs.end())
state->dupAttr(i.symbol, iPos, $$->attrs[i.symbol].pos);
$$->attrs.emplace(
i.symbol,
ExprAttrs::AttrDef(
new ExprSelect(iPos, from, i.symbol),
iPos,
ExprAttrs::AttrDef::Kind::InheritedFrom));
}
delete $6;
}
| { $$ = new ExprAttrs(state->at(@0)); }
;
attrs
: attrs attr { $$ = $1; $1->emplace_back(AttrName(state->symbols.create($2)), state->at(@2)); }
Dynamic attrs This adds new syntax for attribute names: * attrs."${name}" => getAttr name attrs * attrs ? "${name}" => isAttrs attrs && hasAttr attrs name * attrs."${name}" or def => if attrs ? "${name}" then attrs."${name}" else def * { "${name}" = value; } => listToAttrs [{ inherit name value; }] Of course, it's a bit more complicated than that. The attribute chains can be arbitrarily long and contain combinations of static and dynamic parts (e.g. attrs."${foo}".bar."${baz}" or qux), which is relatively straightforward for the getAttrs/hasAttrs cases but is more complex for the listToAttrs case due to rules about duplicate attribute definitions. For attribute sets with dynamic attribute names, duplicate static attributes are detected at parse time while duplicate dynamic attributes are detected when the attribute set is forced. So, for example, { a = null; a.b = null; "${"c"}" = true; } will be a parse-time error, while { a = {}; "${"a"}".b = null; c = true; } will be an eval-time error (technically that case could theoretically be detected at parse time, but the general case would require full evaluation). Moreover, duplicate dynamic attributes are not allowed even in cases where they would be with static attributes ({ a.b.d = true; a.b.c = false; } is legal, but { a."${"b"}".d = true; a."${"b"}".c = false; } is not). This restriction might be relaxed in the future in cases where the static variant would not be an error, but it is not obvious that that is desirable. Finally, recursive attribute sets with dynamic attributes have the static attributes in scope but not the dynamic ones. So rec { a = true; "${"b"}" = a; } is equivalent to { a = true; b = true; } but rec { "${"a"}" = true; b = a; } would be an error or use a from the surrounding scope if it exists. Note that the getAttr, getAttr or default, and hasAttr are all implemented purely in the parser as syntactic sugar, while attribute sets with dynamic attribute names required changes to the AST to be implemented cleanly. This is an alternative solution to and closes #167 Signed-off-by: Shea Levy <shea@shealevy.com>
2013-09-21 06:25:30 +03:00
| attrs string_attr
{ $$ = $1;
ExprString * str = dynamic_cast<ExprString *>($2);
Dynamic attrs This adds new syntax for attribute names: * attrs."${name}" => getAttr name attrs * attrs ? "${name}" => isAttrs attrs && hasAttr attrs name * attrs."${name}" or def => if attrs ? "${name}" then attrs."${name}" else def * { "${name}" = value; } => listToAttrs [{ inherit name value; }] Of course, it's a bit more complicated than that. The attribute chains can be arbitrarily long and contain combinations of static and dynamic parts (e.g. attrs."${foo}".bar."${baz}" or qux), which is relatively straightforward for the getAttrs/hasAttrs cases but is more complex for the listToAttrs case due to rules about duplicate attribute definitions. For attribute sets with dynamic attribute names, duplicate static attributes are detected at parse time while duplicate dynamic attributes are detected when the attribute set is forced. So, for example, { a = null; a.b = null; "${"c"}" = true; } will be a parse-time error, while { a = {}; "${"a"}".b = null; c = true; } will be an eval-time error (technically that case could theoretically be detected at parse time, but the general case would require full evaluation). Moreover, duplicate dynamic attributes are not allowed even in cases where they would be with static attributes ({ a.b.d = true; a.b.c = false; } is legal, but { a."${"b"}".d = true; a."${"b"}".c = false; } is not). This restriction might be relaxed in the future in cases where the static variant would not be an error, but it is not obvious that that is desirable. Finally, recursive attribute sets with dynamic attributes have the static attributes in scope but not the dynamic ones. So rec { a = true; "${"b"}" = a; } is equivalent to { a = true; b = true; } but rec { "${"a"}" = true; b = a; } would be an error or use a from the surrounding scope if it exists. Note that the getAttr, getAttr or default, and hasAttr are all implemented purely in the parser as syntactic sugar, while attribute sets with dynamic attribute names required changes to the AST to be implemented cleanly. This is an alternative solution to and closes #167 Signed-off-by: Shea Levy <shea@shealevy.com>
2013-09-21 06:25:30 +03:00
if (str) {
$$->emplace_back(AttrName(state->symbols.create(str->s)), state->at(@2));
Dynamic attrs This adds new syntax for attribute names: * attrs."${name}" => getAttr name attrs * attrs ? "${name}" => isAttrs attrs && hasAttr attrs name * attrs."${name}" or def => if attrs ? "${name}" then attrs."${name}" else def * { "${name}" = value; } => listToAttrs [{ inherit name value; }] Of course, it's a bit more complicated than that. The attribute chains can be arbitrarily long and contain combinations of static and dynamic parts (e.g. attrs."${foo}".bar."${baz}" or qux), which is relatively straightforward for the getAttrs/hasAttrs cases but is more complex for the listToAttrs case due to rules about duplicate attribute definitions. For attribute sets with dynamic attribute names, duplicate static attributes are detected at parse time while duplicate dynamic attributes are detected when the attribute set is forced. So, for example, { a = null; a.b = null; "${"c"}" = true; } will be a parse-time error, while { a = {}; "${"a"}".b = null; c = true; } will be an eval-time error (technically that case could theoretically be detected at parse time, but the general case would require full evaluation). Moreover, duplicate dynamic attributes are not allowed even in cases where they would be with static attributes ({ a.b.d = true; a.b.c = false; } is legal, but { a."${"b"}".d = true; a."${"b"}".c = false; } is not). This restriction might be relaxed in the future in cases where the static variant would not be an error, but it is not obvious that that is desirable. Finally, recursive attribute sets with dynamic attributes have the static attributes in scope but not the dynamic ones. So rec { a = true; "${"b"}" = a; } is equivalent to { a = true; b = true; } but rec { "${"a"}" = true; b = a; } would be an error or use a from the surrounding scope if it exists. Note that the getAttr, getAttr or default, and hasAttr are all implemented purely in the parser as syntactic sugar, while attribute sets with dynamic attribute names required changes to the AST to be implemented cleanly. This is an alternative solution to and closes #167 Signed-off-by: Shea Levy <shea@shealevy.com>
2013-09-21 06:25:30 +03:00
delete str;
} else
throw ParseError({
2024-02-04 06:35:19 +02:00
.msg = HintFmt("dynamic attributes not allowed in inherit"),
.pos = state->positions[state->at(@2)]
});
Dynamic attrs This adds new syntax for attribute names: * attrs."${name}" => getAttr name attrs * attrs ? "${name}" => isAttrs attrs && hasAttr attrs name * attrs."${name}" or def => if attrs ? "${name}" then attrs."${name}" else def * { "${name}" = value; } => listToAttrs [{ inherit name value; }] Of course, it's a bit more complicated than that. The attribute chains can be arbitrarily long and contain combinations of static and dynamic parts (e.g. attrs."${foo}".bar."${baz}" or qux), which is relatively straightforward for the getAttrs/hasAttrs cases but is more complex for the listToAttrs case due to rules about duplicate attribute definitions. For attribute sets with dynamic attribute names, duplicate static attributes are detected at parse time while duplicate dynamic attributes are detected when the attribute set is forced. So, for example, { a = null; a.b = null; "${"c"}" = true; } will be a parse-time error, while { a = {}; "${"a"}".b = null; c = true; } will be an eval-time error (technically that case could theoretically be detected at parse time, but the general case would require full evaluation). Moreover, duplicate dynamic attributes are not allowed even in cases where they would be with static attributes ({ a.b.d = true; a.b.c = false; } is legal, but { a."${"b"}".d = true; a."${"b"}".c = false; } is not). This restriction might be relaxed in the future in cases where the static variant would not be an error, but it is not obvious that that is desirable. Finally, recursive attribute sets with dynamic attributes have the static attributes in scope but not the dynamic ones. So rec { a = true; "${"b"}" = a; } is equivalent to { a = true; b = true; } but rec { "${"a"}" = true; b = a; } would be an error or use a from the surrounding scope if it exists. Note that the getAttr, getAttr or default, and hasAttr are all implemented purely in the parser as syntactic sugar, while attribute sets with dynamic attribute names required changes to the AST to be implemented cleanly. This is an alternative solution to and closes #167 Signed-off-by: Shea Levy <shea@shealevy.com>
2013-09-21 06:25:30 +03:00
}
| { $$ = new std::vector<std::pair<AttrName, PosIdx>>; }
;
attrpath
: attrpath '.' attr { $$ = $1; $1->push_back(AttrName(state->symbols.create($3))); }
Dynamic attrs This adds new syntax for attribute names: * attrs."${name}" => getAttr name attrs * attrs ? "${name}" => isAttrs attrs && hasAttr attrs name * attrs."${name}" or def => if attrs ? "${name}" then attrs."${name}" else def * { "${name}" = value; } => listToAttrs [{ inherit name value; }] Of course, it's a bit more complicated than that. The attribute chains can be arbitrarily long and contain combinations of static and dynamic parts (e.g. attrs."${foo}".bar."${baz}" or qux), which is relatively straightforward for the getAttrs/hasAttrs cases but is more complex for the listToAttrs case due to rules about duplicate attribute definitions. For attribute sets with dynamic attribute names, duplicate static attributes are detected at parse time while duplicate dynamic attributes are detected when the attribute set is forced. So, for example, { a = null; a.b = null; "${"c"}" = true; } will be a parse-time error, while { a = {}; "${"a"}".b = null; c = true; } will be an eval-time error (technically that case could theoretically be detected at parse time, but the general case would require full evaluation). Moreover, duplicate dynamic attributes are not allowed even in cases where they would be with static attributes ({ a.b.d = true; a.b.c = false; } is legal, but { a."${"b"}".d = true; a."${"b"}".c = false; } is not). This restriction might be relaxed in the future in cases where the static variant would not be an error, but it is not obvious that that is desirable. Finally, recursive attribute sets with dynamic attributes have the static attributes in scope but not the dynamic ones. So rec { a = true; "${"b"}" = a; } is equivalent to { a = true; b = true; } but rec { "${"a"}" = true; b = a; } would be an error or use a from the surrounding scope if it exists. Note that the getAttr, getAttr or default, and hasAttr are all implemented purely in the parser as syntactic sugar, while attribute sets with dynamic attribute names required changes to the AST to be implemented cleanly. This is an alternative solution to and closes #167 Signed-off-by: Shea Levy <shea@shealevy.com>
2013-09-21 06:25:30 +03:00
| attrpath '.' string_attr
{ $$ = $1;
ExprString * str = dynamic_cast<ExprString *>($3);
Dynamic attrs This adds new syntax for attribute names: * attrs."${name}" => getAttr name attrs * attrs ? "${name}" => isAttrs attrs && hasAttr attrs name * attrs."${name}" or def => if attrs ? "${name}" then attrs."${name}" else def * { "${name}" = value; } => listToAttrs [{ inherit name value; }] Of course, it's a bit more complicated than that. The attribute chains can be arbitrarily long and contain combinations of static and dynamic parts (e.g. attrs."${foo}".bar."${baz}" or qux), which is relatively straightforward for the getAttrs/hasAttrs cases but is more complex for the listToAttrs case due to rules about duplicate attribute definitions. For attribute sets with dynamic attribute names, duplicate static attributes are detected at parse time while duplicate dynamic attributes are detected when the attribute set is forced. So, for example, { a = null; a.b = null; "${"c"}" = true; } will be a parse-time error, while { a = {}; "${"a"}".b = null; c = true; } will be an eval-time error (technically that case could theoretically be detected at parse time, but the general case would require full evaluation). Moreover, duplicate dynamic attributes are not allowed even in cases where they would be with static attributes ({ a.b.d = true; a.b.c = false; } is legal, but { a."${"b"}".d = true; a."${"b"}".c = false; } is not). This restriction might be relaxed in the future in cases where the static variant would not be an error, but it is not obvious that that is desirable. Finally, recursive attribute sets with dynamic attributes have the static attributes in scope but not the dynamic ones. So rec { a = true; "${"b"}" = a; } is equivalent to { a = true; b = true; } but rec { "${"a"}" = true; b = a; } would be an error or use a from the surrounding scope if it exists. Note that the getAttr, getAttr or default, and hasAttr are all implemented purely in the parser as syntactic sugar, while attribute sets with dynamic attribute names required changes to the AST to be implemented cleanly. This is an alternative solution to and closes #167 Signed-off-by: Shea Levy <shea@shealevy.com>
2013-09-21 06:25:30 +03:00
if (str) {
$$->push_back(AttrName(state->symbols.create(str->s)));
Dynamic attrs This adds new syntax for attribute names: * attrs."${name}" => getAttr name attrs * attrs ? "${name}" => isAttrs attrs && hasAttr attrs name * attrs."${name}" or def => if attrs ? "${name}" then attrs."${name}" else def * { "${name}" = value; } => listToAttrs [{ inherit name value; }] Of course, it's a bit more complicated than that. The attribute chains can be arbitrarily long and contain combinations of static and dynamic parts (e.g. attrs."${foo}".bar."${baz}" or qux), which is relatively straightforward for the getAttrs/hasAttrs cases but is more complex for the listToAttrs case due to rules about duplicate attribute definitions. For attribute sets with dynamic attribute names, duplicate static attributes are detected at parse time while duplicate dynamic attributes are detected when the attribute set is forced. So, for example, { a = null; a.b = null; "${"c"}" = true; } will be a parse-time error, while { a = {}; "${"a"}".b = null; c = true; } will be an eval-time error (technically that case could theoretically be detected at parse time, but the general case would require full evaluation). Moreover, duplicate dynamic attributes are not allowed even in cases where they would be with static attributes ({ a.b.d = true; a.b.c = false; } is legal, but { a."${"b"}".d = true; a."${"b"}".c = false; } is not). This restriction might be relaxed in the future in cases where the static variant would not be an error, but it is not obvious that that is desirable. Finally, recursive attribute sets with dynamic attributes have the static attributes in scope but not the dynamic ones. So rec { a = true; "${"b"}" = a; } is equivalent to { a = true; b = true; } but rec { "${"a"}" = true; b = a; } would be an error or use a from the surrounding scope if it exists. Note that the getAttr, getAttr or default, and hasAttr are all implemented purely in the parser as syntactic sugar, while attribute sets with dynamic attribute names required changes to the AST to be implemented cleanly. This is an alternative solution to and closes #167 Signed-off-by: Shea Levy <shea@shealevy.com>
2013-09-21 06:25:30 +03:00
delete str;
} else
$$->push_back(AttrName($3));
Dynamic attrs This adds new syntax for attribute names: * attrs."${name}" => getAttr name attrs * attrs ? "${name}" => isAttrs attrs && hasAttr attrs name * attrs."${name}" or def => if attrs ? "${name}" then attrs."${name}" else def * { "${name}" = value; } => listToAttrs [{ inherit name value; }] Of course, it's a bit more complicated than that. The attribute chains can be arbitrarily long and contain combinations of static and dynamic parts (e.g. attrs."${foo}".bar."${baz}" or qux), which is relatively straightforward for the getAttrs/hasAttrs cases but is more complex for the listToAttrs case due to rules about duplicate attribute definitions. For attribute sets with dynamic attribute names, duplicate static attributes are detected at parse time while duplicate dynamic attributes are detected when the attribute set is forced. So, for example, { a = null; a.b = null; "${"c"}" = true; } will be a parse-time error, while { a = {}; "${"a"}".b = null; c = true; } will be an eval-time error (technically that case could theoretically be detected at parse time, but the general case would require full evaluation). Moreover, duplicate dynamic attributes are not allowed even in cases where they would be with static attributes ({ a.b.d = true; a.b.c = false; } is legal, but { a."${"b"}".d = true; a."${"b"}".c = false; } is not). This restriction might be relaxed in the future in cases where the static variant would not be an error, but it is not obvious that that is desirable. Finally, recursive attribute sets with dynamic attributes have the static attributes in scope but not the dynamic ones. So rec { a = true; "${"b"}" = a; } is equivalent to { a = true; b = true; } but rec { "${"a"}" = true; b = a; } would be an error or use a from the surrounding scope if it exists. Note that the getAttr, getAttr or default, and hasAttr are all implemented purely in the parser as syntactic sugar, while attribute sets with dynamic attribute names required changes to the AST to be implemented cleanly. This is an alternative solution to and closes #167 Signed-off-by: Shea Levy <shea@shealevy.com>
2013-09-21 06:25:30 +03:00
}
| attr { $$ = new std::vector<AttrName>; $$->push_back(AttrName(state->symbols.create($1))); }
Dynamic attrs This adds new syntax for attribute names: * attrs."${name}" => getAttr name attrs * attrs ? "${name}" => isAttrs attrs && hasAttr attrs name * attrs."${name}" or def => if attrs ? "${name}" then attrs."${name}" else def * { "${name}" = value; } => listToAttrs [{ inherit name value; }] Of course, it's a bit more complicated than that. The attribute chains can be arbitrarily long and contain combinations of static and dynamic parts (e.g. attrs."${foo}".bar."${baz}" or qux), which is relatively straightforward for the getAttrs/hasAttrs cases but is more complex for the listToAttrs case due to rules about duplicate attribute definitions. For attribute sets with dynamic attribute names, duplicate static attributes are detected at parse time while duplicate dynamic attributes are detected when the attribute set is forced. So, for example, { a = null; a.b = null; "${"c"}" = true; } will be a parse-time error, while { a = {}; "${"a"}".b = null; c = true; } will be an eval-time error (technically that case could theoretically be detected at parse time, but the general case would require full evaluation). Moreover, duplicate dynamic attributes are not allowed even in cases where they would be with static attributes ({ a.b.d = true; a.b.c = false; } is legal, but { a."${"b"}".d = true; a."${"b"}".c = false; } is not). This restriction might be relaxed in the future in cases where the static variant would not be an error, but it is not obvious that that is desirable. Finally, recursive attribute sets with dynamic attributes have the static attributes in scope but not the dynamic ones. So rec { a = true; "${"b"}" = a; } is equivalent to { a = true; b = true; } but rec { "${"a"}" = true; b = a; } would be an error or use a from the surrounding scope if it exists. Note that the getAttr, getAttr or default, and hasAttr are all implemented purely in the parser as syntactic sugar, while attribute sets with dynamic attribute names required changes to the AST to be implemented cleanly. This is an alternative solution to and closes #167 Signed-off-by: Shea Levy <shea@shealevy.com>
2013-09-21 06:25:30 +03:00
| string_attr
2022-02-21 17:32:34 +02:00
{ $$ = new std::vector<AttrName>;
Dynamic attrs This adds new syntax for attribute names: * attrs."${name}" => getAttr name attrs * attrs ? "${name}" => isAttrs attrs && hasAttr attrs name * attrs."${name}" or def => if attrs ? "${name}" then attrs."${name}" else def * { "${name}" = value; } => listToAttrs [{ inherit name value; }] Of course, it's a bit more complicated than that. The attribute chains can be arbitrarily long and contain combinations of static and dynamic parts (e.g. attrs."${foo}".bar."${baz}" or qux), which is relatively straightforward for the getAttrs/hasAttrs cases but is more complex for the listToAttrs case due to rules about duplicate attribute definitions. For attribute sets with dynamic attribute names, duplicate static attributes are detected at parse time while duplicate dynamic attributes are detected when the attribute set is forced. So, for example, { a = null; a.b = null; "${"c"}" = true; } will be a parse-time error, while { a = {}; "${"a"}".b = null; c = true; } will be an eval-time error (technically that case could theoretically be detected at parse time, but the general case would require full evaluation). Moreover, duplicate dynamic attributes are not allowed even in cases where they would be with static attributes ({ a.b.d = true; a.b.c = false; } is legal, but { a."${"b"}".d = true; a."${"b"}".c = false; } is not). This restriction might be relaxed in the future in cases where the static variant would not be an error, but it is not obvious that that is desirable. Finally, recursive attribute sets with dynamic attributes have the static attributes in scope but not the dynamic ones. So rec { a = true; "${"b"}" = a; } is equivalent to { a = true; b = true; } but rec { "${"a"}" = true; b = a; } would be an error or use a from the surrounding scope if it exists. Note that the getAttr, getAttr or default, and hasAttr are all implemented purely in the parser as syntactic sugar, while attribute sets with dynamic attribute names required changes to the AST to be implemented cleanly. This is an alternative solution to and closes #167 Signed-off-by: Shea Levy <shea@shealevy.com>
2013-09-21 06:25:30 +03:00
ExprString *str = dynamic_cast<ExprString *>($1);
if (str) {
$$->push_back(AttrName(state->symbols.create(str->s)));
Dynamic attrs This adds new syntax for attribute names: * attrs."${name}" => getAttr name attrs * attrs ? "${name}" => isAttrs attrs && hasAttr attrs name * attrs."${name}" or def => if attrs ? "${name}" then attrs."${name}" else def * { "${name}" = value; } => listToAttrs [{ inherit name value; }] Of course, it's a bit more complicated than that. The attribute chains can be arbitrarily long and contain combinations of static and dynamic parts (e.g. attrs."${foo}".bar."${baz}" or qux), which is relatively straightforward for the getAttrs/hasAttrs cases but is more complex for the listToAttrs case due to rules about duplicate attribute definitions. For attribute sets with dynamic attribute names, duplicate static attributes are detected at parse time while duplicate dynamic attributes are detected when the attribute set is forced. So, for example, { a = null; a.b = null; "${"c"}" = true; } will be a parse-time error, while { a = {}; "${"a"}".b = null; c = true; } will be an eval-time error (technically that case could theoretically be detected at parse time, but the general case would require full evaluation). Moreover, duplicate dynamic attributes are not allowed even in cases where they would be with static attributes ({ a.b.d = true; a.b.c = false; } is legal, but { a."${"b"}".d = true; a."${"b"}".c = false; } is not). This restriction might be relaxed in the future in cases where the static variant would not be an error, but it is not obvious that that is desirable. Finally, recursive attribute sets with dynamic attributes have the static attributes in scope but not the dynamic ones. So rec { a = true; "${"b"}" = a; } is equivalent to { a = true; b = true; } but rec { "${"a"}" = true; b = a; } would be an error or use a from the surrounding scope if it exists. Note that the getAttr, getAttr or default, and hasAttr are all implemented purely in the parser as syntactic sugar, while attribute sets with dynamic attribute names required changes to the AST to be implemented cleanly. This is an alternative solution to and closes #167 Signed-off-by: Shea Levy <shea@shealevy.com>
2013-09-21 06:25:30 +03:00
delete str;
} else
$$->push_back(AttrName($1));
Dynamic attrs This adds new syntax for attribute names: * attrs."${name}" => getAttr name attrs * attrs ? "${name}" => isAttrs attrs && hasAttr attrs name * attrs."${name}" or def => if attrs ? "${name}" then attrs."${name}" else def * { "${name}" = value; } => listToAttrs [{ inherit name value; }] Of course, it's a bit more complicated than that. The attribute chains can be arbitrarily long and contain combinations of static and dynamic parts (e.g. attrs."${foo}".bar."${baz}" or qux), which is relatively straightforward for the getAttrs/hasAttrs cases but is more complex for the listToAttrs case due to rules about duplicate attribute definitions. For attribute sets with dynamic attribute names, duplicate static attributes are detected at parse time while duplicate dynamic attributes are detected when the attribute set is forced. So, for example, { a = null; a.b = null; "${"c"}" = true; } will be a parse-time error, while { a = {}; "${"a"}".b = null; c = true; } will be an eval-time error (technically that case could theoretically be detected at parse time, but the general case would require full evaluation). Moreover, duplicate dynamic attributes are not allowed even in cases where they would be with static attributes ({ a.b.d = true; a.b.c = false; } is legal, but { a."${"b"}".d = true; a."${"b"}".c = false; } is not). This restriction might be relaxed in the future in cases where the static variant would not be an error, but it is not obvious that that is desirable. Finally, recursive attribute sets with dynamic attributes have the static attributes in scope but not the dynamic ones. So rec { a = true; "${"b"}" = a; } is equivalent to { a = true; b = true; } but rec { "${"a"}" = true; b = a; } would be an error or use a from the surrounding scope if it exists. Note that the getAttr, getAttr or default, and hasAttr are all implemented purely in the parser as syntactic sugar, while attribute sets with dynamic attribute names required changes to the AST to be implemented cleanly. This is an alternative solution to and closes #167 Signed-off-by: Shea Levy <shea@shealevy.com>
2013-09-21 06:25:30 +03:00
}
;
attr
2023-02-12 06:45:25 +02:00
: ID
| OR_KW { $$ = {"or", 2}; }
Dynamic attrs This adds new syntax for attribute names: * attrs."${name}" => getAttr name attrs * attrs ? "${name}" => isAttrs attrs && hasAttr attrs name * attrs."${name}" or def => if attrs ? "${name}" then attrs."${name}" else def * { "${name}" = value; } => listToAttrs [{ inherit name value; }] Of course, it's a bit more complicated than that. The attribute chains can be arbitrarily long and contain combinations of static and dynamic parts (e.g. attrs."${foo}".bar."${baz}" or qux), which is relatively straightforward for the getAttrs/hasAttrs cases but is more complex for the listToAttrs case due to rules about duplicate attribute definitions. For attribute sets with dynamic attribute names, duplicate static attributes are detected at parse time while duplicate dynamic attributes are detected when the attribute set is forced. So, for example, { a = null; a.b = null; "${"c"}" = true; } will be a parse-time error, while { a = {}; "${"a"}".b = null; c = true; } will be an eval-time error (technically that case could theoretically be detected at parse time, but the general case would require full evaluation). Moreover, duplicate dynamic attributes are not allowed even in cases where they would be with static attributes ({ a.b.d = true; a.b.c = false; } is legal, but { a."${"b"}".d = true; a."${"b"}".c = false; } is not). This restriction might be relaxed in the future in cases where the static variant would not be an error, but it is not obvious that that is desirable. Finally, recursive attribute sets with dynamic attributes have the static attributes in scope but not the dynamic ones. So rec { a = true; "${"b"}" = a; } is equivalent to { a = true; b = true; } but rec { "${"a"}" = true; b = a; } would be an error or use a from the surrounding scope if it exists. Note that the getAttr, getAttr or default, and hasAttr are all implemented purely in the parser as syntactic sugar, while attribute sets with dynamic attribute names required changes to the AST to be implemented cleanly. This is an alternative solution to and closes #167 Signed-off-by: Shea Levy <shea@shealevy.com>
2013-09-21 06:25:30 +03:00
;
string_attr
: '"' string_parts '"' { $$ = $2; }
| DOLLAR_CURLY expr '}' { $$ = $2; }
;
expr_list
: expr_list expr_select { $$ = $1; $1->elems.push_back($2); /* !!! dangerous */ }
| { $$ = new ExprList; }
;
formals
: formal ',' formals
{ $$ = $3; $$->formals.emplace_back(*$1); delete $1; }
| formal
{ $$ = new Formals; $$->formals.emplace_back(*$1); $$->ellipsis = false; delete $1; }
|
{ $$ = new Formals; $$->ellipsis = false; }
| ELLIPSIS
{ $$ = new Formals; $$->ellipsis = true; }
;
formal
: ID { $$ = new Formal{CUR_POS, state->symbols.create($1), 0}; }
| ID '?' expr { $$ = new Formal{CUR_POS, state->symbols.create($1), $3}; }
;
2013-09-02 17:29:15 +03:00
%%
#include "eval.hh"
namespace nix {
2013-09-02 17:29:15 +03:00
Expr * parseExprFromBuf(
char * text,
size_t length,
Pos::Origin origin,
const SourcePath & basePath,
SymbolTable & symbols,
const EvalSettings & settings,
PosTable & positions,
2024-07-09 20:25:45 +03:00
DocCommentMap & docComments,
const ref<SourceAccessor> rootFS,
const Expr::AstSymbols & astSymbols)
{
yyscan_t scanner;
LexerState lexerState {
2024-07-09 20:25:45 +03:00
.positionToDocComment = docComments,
.positions = positions,
.origin = positions.addOrigin(origin, length),
};
ParserState state {
.lexerState = lexerState,
.symbols = symbols,
.positions = positions,
.basePath = basePath,
.origin = lexerState.origin,
.rootFS = rootFS,
.s = astSymbols,
.settings = settings,
};
yylex_init_extra(&lexerState, &scanner);
Finally _destroy([&] { yylex_destroy(scanner); });
2013-09-02 17:29:15 +03:00
yy_scan_buffer(text, length, scanner);
yyparse(scanner, &state);
return state.result;
}
}