Using Parsec to parse regular expressions
context-free-grammar, grammar, haskell, parsec, parsing
Solution
You should use `Parsec.Expr.buildExprParser`; it is ideal for this purpose. You simply describe your operators, their precedence and associativity, and how to parse an atom, and the combinator builds the parser for you!
You probably also want to add the ability to group terms with parens so that you can apply `*` to more than just a single literal.
Here's my attempt (I threw in `|`, `+`, and `?` for good measure):
import Control.Applicative
import Control.Monad
import Text.ParserCombinators.Parsec
import Text.ParserCombinators.Parsec.Expr
data Term = Literal Char
| Sequence [Term]
| Repeat (Int, Maybe Int) Term
| Choice [Term]
deriving ( Show )
term :: Parser Term
term = buildExpressionParser ops atom where
ops = [ [ Postfix (Repeat (0, Nothing) <$ char '*')
, Postfix (Repeat (1, Nothing) <$ char '+')
, Postfix (Repeat (0, Just 1) <$ char '?')
]
, [ Infix (return sequence) AssocRight
]
, [ Infix (choice <$ char '|') AssocRight
]
]
atom = msum [ Literal <$> lit
, parens term
]
lit = noneOf "*+?|()"
sequence a b = Sequence $ (seqTerms a) ++ (seqTerms b)
choice a b = Choice $ (choiceTerms a) ++ (choiceTerms b)
parens = between (char '(') (char ')')
seqTerms (Sequence ts) = ts
seqTerms t = [t]
choiceTerms (Choice ts) = ts
choiceTerms t = [t]
main = parseTest term "he(llo)*|wor+ld?"
Problem
I'm trying to learn Parsec by implementing a small regular expression parser. In BNF, my grammar looks something like: ``` EXP : EXP * | LIT EXP | LIT ``` I've tried to implement this in Haskell as: ``` expr = try star <|> try litE <|> lit litE = do c <- noneOf "*" rest <- expr return (c : rest) lit = do c <- noneOf "*" return [c] star = do content <- expr char '*' return (content ++ "*") ``` There are some infinite loops here though (e.g. expr -> star -> expr without consuming any tokens) which makes the parser loop forever. I'm not really sure how to fix it though, because the very nature of `star` is that it consumes its mandatory token at the end. Any thoughts?