ENIGMA Development Environment

Hello, all.

I'm happy to say stdio.h parses correctly, which means it's all uphill from here. (That saying makes no sense. Isn't going up hill more difficult than going down?) Okay, how about, it's smooth sailing from here.

Now, note that stdio is by far not the most difficult header to parse. Overall, it probably only tests 70% of what needs testing. The C++ headers will present plenty of challenge, as scopes will turn into my worst enemies. However, having stdio compile means that I can rely on some very basic things working as I tackle the more complicated problems. I can't really think of an analogy for what that means.

I'm very confident that quite soon, map<var,var> will be ENIGMA-parser-friendly.

Anyway, I'm going to move on to other C headers first, as there are some aspects of C that I've not yet focused on. These include the following, for those who are literate in the language:

#define concat(x,y) x##y This appears in many headers stdio includes. It's a wonder stdio actually works, unless I've implemented it and forgotten, which is a distinct possibility.

int (*blah)(int,int)[];Not sure how it will handle the parentheses around blah, or no identifier being named after int. It will probably bitch about both, so I'll run some isolated tests on that before I parse anything else. Do note that the system was designed with those in mind.

...Actually, that's it. Everything else should follow once those are done. Then we move on to templates (mostly implemented), class (needs to be integrated into the piece of code that handles struct), scope operator (see below) and tacos.

Scope operator (from bits/stl_tree.h):
pair<typename _Rb_tree<_Key,_Val,_KeyOfValue,_Compare,_Alloc>::iterator,bool>
In honesty, that was just to scare people. Like I told that one guy that none of you have ever heard of, that line doesn't look so scary when read character by character at millions of chars per second.

End.

I have successfully implemented 90% of everything, and am working on the rest of the ten percent as I attempt to parse system headers.

Let me tell you, I'm surprised. Those coders managed to write headers that have attitude. These things are sentient, angry source codes, and they don't like new parsers. Honestly, the things are some sort of intelligent. They have to be.

Including file from features.h
Including file from sys/cdefs.h
Including file from sys/cdefs.h
Including file from features.h
Including file from sys/cdefs.h
Including file from features.h
Including file from sys/cdefs.h
Including file from features.h
Including file from sys/cdefs.h
Including file from features.h
Including file from sys/cdefs.h
Including file from features.h
...Repeats past max SMF character limit...
Including file from sys/cdefs.h
Including file from features.h
Including file from sys/cdefs.h
Including file from features.h
Including file from sys/cdefs.h
Including file from features.h
Including file from sys/cdefs.h
Including file from features.h
Parse time: 1340 milliseconds

Line 330, position 25: Failed to include sys/cdefs.h: File not found
Macros (44):
  _ATFILE_SOURCE: 1
  _BSD_SOURCE: 1
  _FEATURES_H: 1
  _ISOC99_SOURCE: 1
  _LARGEFILE64_SOURCE: 1
  _LARGEFILE_SOURCE: 1
  _POSIX_C_SOURCE: 200112L
  _POSIX_SOURCE: 1
  _SVID_SOURCE: 1
  _SYS_CDEFS_H: 1
  _XOPEN_SOURCE: 600
  _XOPEN_SOURCE_EXTENDED: 1
  __FAVOR_BSD: 1
  __GLIBC_HAVE_LONG_LONG: 1
  __GLIBC_MINOR__: 9
  __GLIBC_PREREQ(maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min): \
        ((__GLIBC__ << 16) + __GLIBC_MINOR__ >= ((maj) << 16) + (min))
  __GLIBC__: 2
  __GNUC_PREREQ(maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min,maj,min): 0
  __GNU_LIBRARY__: 6
  __KERNEL_STRICT_NAMES: #endif
  __STDC_IEC_559_COMPLEX__: 1
  __STDC_IEC_559__: 1
  __STDC_ISO_10646__: 200009L
  __USE_ANSI: 1
  __USE_ATFILE: 1
  __USE_BSD: 1
  __USE_FILE_OFFSET64: 1
  __USE_FORTIFY_LEVEL: 0
  __USE_GNU: 1
  __USE_ISOC95: 1
  __USE_ISOC99: 1
  __USE_LARGEFILE: 1
  __USE_LARGEFILE64: 1
  __USE_MISC: 1
  __USE_POSIX: 1
  __USE_POSIX199309: 1
  __USE_POSIX199506: 1
  __USE_POSIX2: 1
  __USE_REENTRANT: 1
  __USE_SVID: 1
  __USE_UNIX98: 1
  __USE_XOPEN: 1
  __USE_XOPEN2K: 1
  __USE_XOPEN_EXTENDED: 1

Variables:auto:   Serves as typename
bool:   Serves as typename
char:   Serves as typename
const:   Serves as typename
double:   Serves as typename
float:   Serves as typename
int:   Serves as typename
long:   Serves as typename
register:   Serves as typename
short:   Serves as typename
signed:   Serves as typename
static:   Serves as typename
unsigned:   Serves as typename
volatile:   Serves as typename

The best I can make of that output is that somewhere along the line, I had too many files open.
...Fixed. Now it loops forever like... like it should, I suppose.

I know the error is because I forgot to share my macro function implementation with the expression evaluator, and will fix that next. I just thought I'd share the O___o moment and the news that the basics are al(most)l working.

= No.

My drivers suck. Tried to fix that with Retro, as well as my mouse problems... Long story short, I Just finished reinstalling the X server. <_<"

Anyway, my sound quality sucks so bad I can't test audio here. I'll do that on Windows, but it should still work in Linux for anyone whose drivers don't suck as bad as mine.

Other issue is template instantiation, which I'm going to have to do every time a template is used. (Because map<var,var> is different than map<int,int> in enough ways that I need to keep track separately).
Though, honestly, I can't really think of a good reason to keep track to the level of instantiating them, so maybe I'll drop the idea before it hurts something.

I have to attend some English garbage at some point, but for the most part, no more homework in there for a while. What I do need to do is draft a large economics paper, read some biology crap, and work on my psychology things. Hopefully those do not consume TOO Much time.

Templates are one of the few remaining obstacles. I'm going to run through the rest of the process to see when I would need to know anything but how many args are optional. It may turn out that I don't need to know anything else. If that's the case, it's solved. That leaves with(), switch(), and #include.

I'll keep you posted when each of those is cleared.

We're on a new server, with a new host. This resulted in some disagreements.

I... Listen, the CFile parser -- and the others, really -- are approaching a stage where they can be released, even without being 100% complete.

Would everyone like an early preview, if I can make one by the ninth?

With some gearing, the preview could have an updater. So there'd be no more wait for R4; You could just download updates.

In fear of some readers being more pious than others, I'd like to clear some things up.
In other words, stop reading at the first big caption.


In summary, Rusky's trying to get me to use a token tree parser by starting work on one as a proof of concept. I assume he will continue to develop it from time to time, until it actually competes with the one I wrote as a competent proof of concept or until I'm all done. Whichever comes first.

I met it with some pretty harsh skepticism. But it's not because I feel token trees are bad.

A tree is a very useful tool. It will allow you to easily skip over large chunks of data to weed out only what you need. They are used in probably more than 90% of modern parsers. I'm not looking up an actual statistic, sorry math fans.

However, I don't feel they're appropriate for the formatter-type parser.

The entire point of the formatter parser is to add semicolons and weed out variable names by declaration. It doesn't really call for a tree, in my opinion.

Here's a sample code:
a=0b=1
That code is valid GML. So now, how do we deal with it?

Those who are weak of heart should stop reading now.

Token tree method:
The code is read into memory in a structure called a tree. A representation is depicted below:
=
├─a
└─0
=
├─b
└─1
To save size, a symbol table is used. It's basically a list of variable names/other things that appear in the code. The table makes comparison of strings from the time of its completion onward operate in constant time by comparing them as an index, not byte for byte. (Means it's efficient)
The code is then rebuilt with all proper punctuation.

My method:
The code undergoes a (somewhat) organized series of stream-like modification.

First, the code is reread into its current buffer free of comments and excess whitespace. This won't affect the code above.
Next, a second block of memory is allocated the size of the first. The first is named code, the second synt.

They look like this:
a=0b=1n=0n=0
Next, the blocks are reallocated at twice the size for all upcoming changes. A pass is made that keeps a look out for patterns of tokens. You'll notice above in the syntax string that variable names have been replaced with n, while numbers have been replaced with 0. This is so only one check has to be made to tell what any given character in the code is a part of.

Notice the "0n". A pass is made to look out for things like that.


More complicated code
Trees are usually, or at least very often, done by using a parser generator of sort, which takes a grammar file that can be easily edited. It organizes the process by giving what I've seen to be a regex-like interface for manipulating what patterns of tokens the parser looks for.

My method's basically a hard-coded version of that. I specify what tokens require a semicolon between them in a separate function, instead of using a generator that reads that info from a text file.

In the code if 0a=10else b=10 the token tree would do just what it did above, using if as a root of another sublevel, then putting the next = token inside it. It would then look up the rules for what's inside if to see what it puts next.

Mine does this, instead:   semis->push(')','s'); write_symbol('(');
Which does nothing but insert a left parenthesis and tell it, next time it needs to insert a semicolon, use ')' instead. This is still done in that pass.
(If I were using only find and replace like I said I could, I'd replace "if(.*);" with "if\($0\)"  )

Rusky said he didn't add for loops to his proof of concept. Wouldn't make much sense for me to do so, because all I had to do to implement for() was push two semicolons and an end parenthesis onto the stack, like I did above.


Partitioning my parser
Rusky's other complaint is that my parser is divided into sections. One's responsible for syntax check, one's responsible for C definitions, one's responsible for adding semicolons/other GM-C replacements. I don't really see what there's to criticize about that, but here's a nice reason to do so...

The formatter parser has more passes and gets more attention than both the syntax check and C parsers combined. However... They're what Rusky will call a disaster, and what I'll tell you are faster than greased lightning.

Instead of lexing, they keep a couple variables handy (integers, actually) that I like to refer to as registers. (I may in fact devote a register to each of them, as they are so few.) They let the CFile parser identify what it's going through now. Each C++ key word has an ID. (not dissimilar to the symbol table of the token tree).
In addition to this ID, a second variable is kept indicating mode. I keep track of these mentally, because that's how I goddamn roll. (Ask score_under). That's the part that really makes Rusky cringe; I rarely comment, and I don't document, because I just memorize all the values, or review my thinking to get back to them.

This ID, however, is the difference between "using" and "using namespace", just for example.

( Typedef is handled differently. Typedef's value is 128 or some crap, so I can just OR whatever I have by it to indicate that I'm typedef'ing it. (C and C++ will let you totally whore typedef) )

The most complicated thing to deal with is what may require a stack, and that's pointers to arrays to pointers....of functions.


Now, here's the kicker: I use a tree to store scope data. Le gasp, right? Each variable is stored the same way. An integer can have members if I really want to. And I can tell you just from using them there how beautiful a system they can be. But knowing that, I still say a pair of aligned strings is the way to go with a formatter.


Benefits/Downfalls

• Tree offers O(1) string comparison. But the parser doesn't need that.
  
• Tree does all punctuation in one pass. But it's liable to leave out, say, entire else statements. And not understand unary unless begged.
  
• String requires multiple passes, but offers some find-replace methodology. To find a declaration, for example, I just search "d".
  
• Tree is more comprehensive. I'm not sure if that's good or bad. I bring up unary again... Luis's parser had a fit on it. And Rusky's won't treat ++ as adding a unary-positive real value, or as incrementing the previous. (But he'll tell you how easy it is to add if you ask him)
  
• Being component based means that my parser's syntax check only needs to do what's necessary for syntax checking... It never touches the C parser. The formatter needs to know the members of declared classes, so it calls the C parser to get that. Syntax check can just add the name as a type.
  

Okay, this is the single longest thing I've ever typed up. If you did any more than just skim it, I feel sorry for you.

I told a2h to rag on me to post what I've done each day.
Don't get your hopes up though; I'm not updating the stupid 'completed functions' page.

Recent activities include collecting all my work from the last few months and organizing them into the same root directory.
What's basically happening is I'm hooking up the Expression evaluator, CFile Parser, Syntax Checker, and EDL Parser up to the Compiler, regardless of what's done and what's not.
This will, ideally, allow me to get them all working together and add on as I go.

I've also begun a large-part recode around the original EDL Parser. It has to be done at some point. Why? Well...

It's a somewhat-known fact that the EDL Parser is written in GML. A lot of you are thinking "wtf" right now. I wrote the parser, then exported it, and parsed it to C++ with itself. And it worked. (With the addition of function names around each script it parsed).

It instantly gained at least a tenfold speed increase, but that's not enough.
(Not to mention parsed GML is plug ugly; NO comments, which is 1% less than the 'desired' percentage of comments I normally leave, and no whitespace or structure)

Basically, the idea's brilliant, but the code's a bit sluggish and eww since it used to be GML. Was the ultimate benchmark, but now things need to be implemented that GML can't describe.

Please take the next couple minutes to get over the fact the parser is/was GML. Read on when you're ready.


Moving on, then, the new parser will not use < to indicate tokens in its stream. Instead, it will add a couple more letters for equally fast, less ambiguous indexing.

Scripts were scoped into each object that used them in R3. In R4, they will be defined in the global scope, and will be passed this. (The C++ loose-equivalent of id) This corrects a problem where with (a) scrname() doesn't work. You probably didn't notice.

Also, localv is being changed to local in light of Yoyo deciding that global var a; was a good idea. Now you can say local var a;, which is about as useless as saying self.varname, but is useful for saying local int a; or local double a; and not wasting all that space and time. (Though not much of either, really.)


Those who pay attention and have decent footing between these two languages know that you will now have the entirety of C++ at your disposal. If you really wanted, you could #include <iostream> and cout << "something";. Unless I decide that I'm going to maintain checking for assignment operator, in which case you'd have to say something stupid before it with an =. Haha.


There's another chunk of work I'm not looking forward to, which involves the new format. We've added basically every resource to the format, but this doesn't mean they all work yet. I'll derive background from sprite, but sound is gonna be a pain in the arse.


Another change, for those with good footing in C++, is that string() will not be a function anymore. GML fans,  don't panic: Saying string() will still work. The difference is purely technical; string() will be a constructor of a new datatype.
I had a problem with var that prohibited me from taking int as an argument type, which hindered efficiency. The new string class should fix that problem. It will be derived from std::string, with some additional namespace magic to prevent screwups.

If anyone really needs me to explain the details of that, I can, but I'm not going to unless someone asks.



In other other news, I'll be continuing development on Linux. Most of you know ENIGMA works on Linux now. Since the OS is more picky with things--for instance, file name capitalization--I think it'd be a good idea to move to it. And file names aren't the extent of it; big GCC, as in, the GCC which is not minimalist or for Windows and likely has the majority of GNU devs on its case, offers more precise error checking and warns on more things. Which is nice, as it prevents errors down the road.


Anyway, I'ma get back to working on the compiler. I have to find my new instance system and put it in the shell folder. After it's at a good stop point, I'm wiping the SVN and reuploading everything. (Makes it easier switching back and forth between platforms).


No news on ENIGMA's LibOGC frontend.

Cheers. A2h will hopefully make me edit this tomorrow. Maybe even post new.

Questions that have been haunting me since day one, and I'm sick of dealing with them, so I'll present them to my user base.

• Var can't return int, string, double, and char*. It just can't; it leads to ambiguity out the back end to where your game won't compile.

Knowing this, do I have all the functions take double and string as parameters (a 100% waste of memory and at least 800% waste of speed), or do I alienate std::string as a return type?

Neither of those are very attractive choices. There is a middle option where I have the user decide whether or not they want to keep var as a type, and re-compile ENIGMA optionally to take scalar arguments. (Scalar meaning one type, in this case of the smallest needed size)

I will try again to get var to work with conflicting cast types, but std::string is the one that causes ambiguity. Even though I added an explicit cast function for it in var. (Meaning I told it exactly what to do to convert var to string, but it errored anyway.)

• Game Maker does not have functions that don't return anything. Even functions in GM that return nothing will actually behave as zero, and can be used in assignment and arithmetic. This isn't the case in C++.

For the first three releases, I returned zero in all those functions, as int for max speed.

Why not do away with them? Some people like to add a function that needs called but returns nothing to a function that must be called after the first function, in order to call them in one statement. Like registry_set_root(3)+registry_read_real_ext("blah","blah")

That's an ugly, yet useful feature of the language. I was considering having function return ENIGMA_VOID, and the return statement at the end be return_void;. This would enable the user to choose whether or not to do this and recompile.

• Game Maker does not return success or fail. Especially for functions like registry_write_string(). A lot of functions that are VERY prone to failure have unclear methods or no method at all of determining whether it worked.

Should ENIGMA return error codes as WinApi does? For registry functions, this would also eliminate combining things like registry_set_root(3)+registry_read_real_ext("blah","blah"), though since registry_set_root will never fail and the latter returns nonzero normally, that's not exactly the best example here.

Maybe a function to check if the last calls succeeded?

• WinApi has developed some since its first release in 1912. As such, we have a set of 16 bit functions that are preserved for compatibility with 95 and 98, but then more recent functions that are meant for 2000+ and may not work on really old Windows systems.

The problem here is, do we stick with the old ones and risk being obsolete come Windows 7, or do we lose 95 and 98 compatibility and go with the new? Again, this can be fixed by compiling separate releases for each operating system, but that's not exactly attractive as an option.



There are plenty more conflicts, but these are just a few that are immediately bothering me.
If you haven't guessed, registry functions have been implemented.

College classes are nearly over; I have a huge take-home final exam to worry about this weekend, followed by 23 more days of high school. But then I'm done, and will actually have a decent amount of time to work. I hope.

First and foremost for those who don't catch on as quickly, we weren't really bought out by Yoyo. Come on. We don't even mean anything to them yet; we're not even on the competition radar.

ANYWAY. Due to constant bother from someone who wanted to pilfer ENIGMA's resource attachment code and for some reason couldn't use the stuff from R3, I hosted the source code.

Which means the most recent ENIGMA is available in the SVN at the sourceforge page, etc.

However, this doesn't mean that the code is operational. It's not that individual pieces don't work, it's that they have not been fitted together.

Those of you with weak constitutions and those of you who do not know C++ can skip this next part.
{
For the rest of you, I'm not going to bother posting the link to the SVN because you're probably resourceful enough to find it, and I'm not exactly enthralled to have functionless code on the intarblagz. It's like coming in one day with a rusty robot then being asked to put its severed limbs on display while you're working on them. Kinda destroys the splendor of the situation.

Nonetheless, it is hosted. I won't be checking it for updates before overwriting it, so if you have any changes to make (which, considering my code is just C++ - formatted manifestation of my ramblings and is therefore illegible, I highly doubt) please let me know here instead. Shouldn't be a problem, because I don't think any C++ programmers have SVN privileges anyway.

There's another set of files that I'm working on, which are the workings of a CFile parser. They are not hosted yet.

Rest assured, I'm good at seeing the big picture. R2 and 3 both looked like this days before their releases.
}

Okay, now for those of all or no C++ skill level, here's what's changing:

• Recoded the syntax checker to support structures. It will also support macros and namespaces. Much easier to code the second time, and I did a much better job. It's about to where it would have been originally (completion wise) at the moment, if I had not decided to support all these nice C++ things. (SVN people can feel free to test what I have, such as nested loops and statements)
• Parser will undergo minor recoding also. The main concept, structure and code flow will stay, as those were all brilliant, imo, though I will be recoding small chunks of it for the sake of optimization-- it should read through the code less than 10% as many times as the first version. (The parser is primarily find-replace. To the point where almost all of it is such, call after call. I want to write something to replace those things in mass, so I don't have to keep iterating through it)
• The macros thing is as simple as making a stack structure that behaves like a string, but has a push and pop function. Instead of just saying while (pos<len), I'll have a condition to be sure that at the end of the string I pop the stack to the next string down. It's probably what G++ does. Namespaces, I'll just keep a list of variables that exist in the global scope, and those that exist in a namespace invoked by or were themselves invoked by the using token.
  
  
• Scripts are being rethought. Instead of each object having a script, this (Pointer to current instance) will be cast to WILDCLASS (so it has all the locals for a short time) and sent to the script. This way you can still call locals like in R3, but it's more efficient for multiple variables and works in with(){} statements.
  
  
• Last, but not least, Luda has promised he'll finish recoding Colligma as soon as ENIGMA is operable. Meaning I'll hold a private release in the meantime while he's doing his thing, then give another few days of testing before the release. This is still in the future, though.

Some of you are mad now because I'm wasting time on a CFile parser, and you don't know why. It's because now you can #include <map> in a new resource in ENIGMA I've named "whitespace." The resource is simply a C++ script editor, which lets you define functions and classes for use in ENIGMA. (Like scripts, only still more efficient)

And finally, I am pleased to announce it is Spring Break. So I have ten days almost completely to myself to work on ENIGMA. I've tried not to complain much, but the workload is pretty big, and I'm actually enrolled in a college course at the same time as the high school ones. So things get hectic sometimes. I'm typing with my eyes closed at this moment, because I'm sorta too tired to keep them open. (Plus, this monitor is killing my eyes on its own. -.-)

That being said... I don't even know what I want from you people. Just hang in there, we're not dead yet.

Final note to SVN crawlers:
All the bugs from R3 are fixed. If you can pick out the fixed codes and patch R3 with them, feel free to hold a private release. May prove a challenge, considering... but feel free to give it a shot.
However, I don't wanna hear how poorly commented my code is, and how ill-structured it is, and how badly it abuses empty space, and how you don't find my choice of profane variable names funny. The code was released under the GPL solely to be in good spirit and ensure free-ness, not because I expect or even want your help and rude commentary.

Thank you.
Sorry if I don't sound myself, I'm pretty tired. Just figured I'd disclaim my SVN before I go to bed, and before it becomes a total train wreck.