• Paper: Syntactic Completions with Material Obligations

    From John R Levine@21:1/5 to All on Tue Aug 26 15:43:01 2025
    This paper proposes a code editor and parser using obligations, a term I
    had not seen before and they do not define, but appears to mean a
    pseudo-tokens that require other tokens later to make them valid. They seem to do better at recovering from syntax errors than other schemes do.


    https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.16848

    Abstract:

    Code editors provide essential services that help developers understand, navigate, and modify programs. However, these services often fail in the presence of syntax errors. Existing syntax error recovery techniques, like panic mode and multi-option repairs, are either too coarse, e.g. in
    deleting large swathes of code, or lead to a proliferation of possible completions. This paper introduces 𝚝𝚢𝚕𝚛, a parser and editor generator
    that completes arbitrarily malformed code by inserting obligations, which generalize holes to cover missing operands, operators, mixfix keywords,
    and sort transitions. 𝚝𝚢𝚕𝚛 is backed by a novel theory of tile-based
    parsing, which extends operator-precedence parsing in two ways. First, traditional token precedence comparisons are replaced by a notion of
    grammar walks, which form the basis for generating obligations. Second, a distinct "molding" system based on grammar zippers expand grammar
    expressivity by allowing the system to disambiguate between possible
    parses and completions based on an obligation minimization criterion. In addition to serving as a novel approach to error correction, 𝚝𝚢𝚕𝚛's design enables the development of an editor that visually materializes obligations to the human user, serving as a novel hybrid between a text
    editor and a structure editor. We introduce 𝚝𝚢𝚕𝚛 by example, then formalize its key ideas. Finally, we conduct a human subjects study to
    evaluate the extent to which an editor like 𝚝𝚢𝚕𝚛 that materializes syntactic obligations might be usable and useful, finding both points of positivity and interesting new avenues for future work.


    Regards,
    John Levine, comp.compilers moderator,
    [email protected], http://compilers.iecc.com

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Derek@21:1/5 to All on Thu Aug 28 22:36:38 2025
    John,

    This paper proposes a code editor and parser using obligations, a term I
    had not seen before and they do not define, but appears to mean

    It looks like they are making terms up to make the work sound
    dramatic, e.g., panicking parser.

    pseudo-tokens that require other tokens later to make them valid. They seem to
    do better at recovering from syntax errors than other schemes do.

    No mention of trial parsing, which has been around since
    the 1960s.

    https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.16848

    Nothing to see here. This is just a mathematical orgasm paper.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)