Ah, neat, it hadn't occured to me to try that, thanks for the example!

On 2/5/2013 6:50 PM, Nigel Thorne wrote:
> I haven't tried this code.. but I think something like this should work..
>
> https://gist.github.com/NigelThorne/4718832
>
> I'm trying to inject the number parser into the Json parser as an example.
>
>
> ---
> "No man is an island... except Philip"
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 10:23 AM, Jonathan Rochkind <[email protected]
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>
>     "prefer composition over inheritance" is indeed a good principle.
>
>     But I don't understand how you actually do what you're saying in
>     this example, in practice. Can you provide a more complete example?
>     Of two parsers that share most of their grammar, except for a
>     different date rule?  (Or am I misunderstanding that as the path to
>     the goal?)
>
>     I don't know how to get the bulk of the shared logic to be in two
>     different parsers DRY, except using either inheritance or a mix-in
>     (a mixin is really just a kind of inheritance too). Your example
>     doesn't show this. But I'm curious to see how to do it, if there is
>     a way! Can you share?
>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>     *From:* [email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]> [[email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>] on behalf of Nigel Thorne
>     [[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>]
>     *Sent:* Tuesday, February 05, 2013 6:02 PM
>     *To:* [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>     *Subject:* Re: [ruby.parslet] International Date Formats
>
>     I always favor composition over inheritance. (Think of it as
>     the strategy pattern)  see
>     
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/243274/best-practice-with-unit-testing-abstract-classes/2947823#2947823
>
>
>     The key here is that rule definitions are nothing special. They are
>     just methods that define methods that return parsers. :)
>
>     The parser >> operator takes a parser and returns a parser.. so your
>     rule body is just defining a parser too.
>
>     You can even do stuff like this.. (thought I would prefer to pass in
>     a date parser myself)
>
>     def date_parser
>          @region == :uk ? (day >> forwardslash >> ukmonth >>
>     forwardslash >> year) : (usmonth >> forwardslash >> day >>
>     forwardslash >> year)
>     end
>
>     and use it in rules like any other parser.
>
>     rule(:shorteeshort) {
>          (space? >> at >> actor.as <http://actor.as/>(:mainactor) >>
>              action >>
>              amountnum >> amountunits >> date_parser ).as(:shortee)
>        }
>
>
>
>
>     ---
>     "No man is an island... except Philip"
>
>
>     On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 9:15 AM, Jeremy Nevill <[email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>
>         Hi,
>
>         Thanks for the quick replies… I think that the oo route is
>         attractive as that would be easier to maintain and feel right.
>
>         Here's my rather unsubtle excerpt for messages I know to be in
>         UK format:
>
>         rule(:shorteeukshort) {
>              (space? >> at >> actor.as <http://actor.as>(:mainactor) >>
>                  action >>
>                  amountnum >> amountunits >>
>                  day >> forwardslash >>
>                  ukmonth >> forwardslash >> year).as(:shortee)
>            }
>
>         A lot of refactoring opportunity to be had… quite why I haven't
>         extracted out the date format bit yet I don't know.
>
>         Just for the record I've been doing a bit of performance testing
>         on sending messages into my Shortee parser and it easily parsers
>         about 300/second when hosted in a rails app on my Macbook Pro
>         using MongoDB as the backend.
>
>         Thanks again, most appreciated.
>
>         Regards,
>
>         Jeremy
>
>
>
>         On 5 Feb 2013, at 21:58, Jonathan Rochkind <[email protected]
>         <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>
>          > 1) Worth investigating the 'chronic' gem, rather than writing
>         a parser
>          > yourself. It can handle all sorts of natural language ish
>         date formats.
>          >
>          > 2) But for your actual question. Parslet parsers are ordinary
>         ruby
>          > classes. They can inherit from each other, as well as use
>         modules.
>          >
>          > So you could start out with an abstract parser class that
>         lacks the rule
>          > for dates, and then have two subclasses,  US and UK, both of
>         which
>          > define their own date rule.
>          >
>          > Or you could use any other implementation sharing OO design. For
>          > instance, start out defining the US one as complete, then
>         have the UK
>          > one sub-class it and over-ride the relevant date rule. Or put
>         the bulk
>          > of your parser (without US/UK specific rules) in a ruby
>         module, then
>          > have both the US and UK ones 'include' that module, and
>         supply their own
>          > locale specific rules.
>          >
>          > I haven't actually tried any of these things recently, but
>         they should
>          > all work, something along those lines. That parslet parsers
>         are just
>          > ordinary ruby classes to which you can use ordinary ruby language
>          > composition features -- is one of the very strong points
>         about parslet
>          > in my opinion.
>          >
>          > On 2/5/2013 4:46 PM, Jeremy Nevill wrote:
>          >> First of all, great parser and documentation which has
>         helped me make the leap from regex to proper parsing.
>          >>
>          >> We're using Parslet it to parse our Shortee event message
>         format, sample messages being:
>          >>
>          >> @JeremyNevill ate 1lambchop 01/02/2013
>          >> @JeremyNevill walked @Rover 3miles 12/dec/2012
>          >>
>          >> I have the parser working nicely, extracting the message
>         entities defined in my syntax:
>         https://github.com/JeremyNevill/shortee
>          >>
>          >> Now the issue I have is how to handle ambiguous dates as we
>         have both US date format and UK date format clients:
>          >>
>          >> e.g. 01/02/2013 in the UK is 1st/Feb/2013 but 2nd/Jan/2013
>         in the US
>          >>
>          >> At present I have 2 very similar parsers, one that handles
>         UK dates, the other that handles US… this is not very DRY and
>         I'm wondering if there is a better way to go…maybe appending the
>         date format required to the message when it gets sent into the
>         parser.
>          >>
>          >> Any help will be most appreciated as I'm a bit stumped on
>         the preferred method for problems like this.
>          >>
>          >> Regards,
>          >>
>          >> Jeremy Nevill
>          >> www.nevill.net <http://www.nevill.net>
>          >>
>
>
>

Reply via email to