va_end (args);
}
-/* Reports an error to the effect that subcommand SBC may only be
- specified once. */
+/* Prints a syntax error message saying that OPTION0 or one of the other
+ strings following it, up to the first NULL, is expected. */
+void
+lex_error_expecting (struct lexer *lexer, const char *option0, ...)
+{
+ enum { MAX_OPTIONS = 8 };
+ const char *options[MAX_OPTIONS + 1];
+ va_list args;
+ int n;
+
+ va_start (args, option0);
+ options[0] = option0;
+ n = 0;
+ while (n + 1 < MAX_OPTIONS && options[n] != NULL)
+ options[++n] = va_arg (args, const char *);
+ va_end (args);
+
+ switch (n)
+ {
+ case 0:
+ lex_error (lexer, NULL);
+ break;
+
+ case 1:
+ lex_error (lexer, _("expecting %s"), options[0]);
+ break;
+
+ case 2:
+ lex_error (lexer, _("expecting %s or %s"), options[0], options[1]);
+ break;
+
+ case 3:
+ lex_error (lexer, _("expecting %s, %s, or %s"), options[0], options[1],
+ options[2]);
+ break;
+
+ case 4:
+ lex_error (lexer, _("expecting %s, %s, %s, or %s"),
+ options[0], options[1], options[2], options[3]);
+ break;
+
+ case 5:
+ lex_error (lexer, _("expecting %s, %s, %s, %s, or %s"),
+ options[0], options[1], options[2], options[3], options[4]);
+ break;
+
+ case 6:
+ lex_error (lexer, _("expecting %s, %s, %s, %s, %s, or %s"),
+ options[0], options[1], options[2], options[3], options[4],
+ options[5]);
+ break;
+
+ case 7:
+ lex_error (lexer, _("expecting %s, %s, %s, %s, %s, %s, or %s"),
+ options[0], options[1], options[2], options[3], options[4],
+ options[5], options[6]);
+ break;
+
+ case 8:
+ lex_error (lexer, _("expecting %s, %s, %s, %s, %s, %s, %s, or %s"),
+ options[0], options[1], options[2], options[3], options[4],
+ options[5], options[6], options[7]);
+ break;
+
+ default:
+ NOT_REACHED ();
+ }
+}
+
+/* Reports an error to the effect that subcommand SBC may only be specified
+ once.
+
+ This function does not take a lexer as an argument or use lex_error(),
+ because the result would ordinarily just be redundant: "Syntax error at
+ SUBCOMMAND: Subcommand SUBCOMMAND may only be specified once.", which does
+ not help the user find the error. */
void
lex_sbc_only_once (const char *sbc)
{
msg (SE, _("Subcommand %s may only be specified once."), sbc);
}
-/* Reports an error to the effect that subcommand SBC is
- missing. */
+/* Reports an error to the effect that subcommand SBC is missing.
+
+ This function does not take a lexer as an argument or use lex_error(),
+ because a missing subcommand can normally be detected only after the whole
+ command has been parsed, and so lex_error() would always report "Syntax
+ error at end of command", which does not help the user find the error. */
void
-lex_sbc_missing (struct lexer *lexer, const char *sbc)
+lex_sbc_missing (const char *sbc)
{
- lex_error (lexer, _("missing required subcommand %s"), sbc);
+ msg (SE, _("Required subcommand %s was not specified."), sbc);
+}
+
+/* Reports an error to the effect that specification SPEC may only be specified
+ once within subcommand SBC. */
+void
+lex_spec_only_once (struct lexer *lexer, const char *sbc, const char *spec)
+{
+ lex_error (lexer, _("%s may only be specified once within subcommand %s"),
+ spec, sbc);
+}
+
+/* Reports an error to the effect that specification SPEC is missing within
+ subcommand SBC. */
+void
+lex_spec_missing (struct lexer *lexer, const char *sbc, const char *spec)
+{
+ lex_error (lexer, _("Required %s specification missing from %s subcommand"),
+ sbc, spec);
}
/* Prints a syntax error message containing the current token and
return true;
else
{
- lex_error (lexer, _("expecting `%s'"), identifier);
+ lex_error_expecting (lexer, identifier, NULL_SENTINEL);
return false;
}
}
}
else
{
- lex_error (lexer, _("expecting `%s'"), token_type_to_string (type));
+ char *s = xasprintf ("`%s'", token_type_to_string (type));
+ lex_error_expecting (lexer, s, NULL_SENTINEL);
+ free (s);
return false;
}
}
}
}
+/* If the current token is a string or an identifier, does nothing and returns
+ true. Otherwise, reports an error and returns false.
+
+ This is meant for use in syntactic situations where we want to encourage the
+ user to supply a quoted string, but for compatibility we also accept
+ identifiers. (One example of such a situation is file names.) Therefore,
+ the error message issued when the current token is wrong only says that a
+ string is expected and doesn't mention that an identifier would also be
+ accepted. */
+bool
+lex_force_string_or_id (struct lexer *lexer)
+{
+ return lex_is_integer (lexer) || lex_force_string (lexer);
+}
+
/* If the current token is an integer, does nothing and returns true.
Otherwise, reports an error and returns false. */
bool
do
{
size_t head_ofs;
+ size_t space;
size_t n;
lex_source_expand__ (src);
head_ofs = src->head - src->tail;
+ space = src->allocated - head_ofs;
n = src->reader->class->read (src->reader, &src->buffer[head_ofs],
- src->allocated - head_ofs,
+ space,
segmenter_get_prompt (&src->segmenter));
+ assert (n <= space);
+
if (n == 0)
{
/* End of input.
lex_source_destroy (struct lex_source *src)
{
char *file_name = src->reader->file_name;
- if (src->reader->class->close != NULL)
- src->reader->class->close (src->reader);
+ if (src->reader->class->destroy != NULL)
+ src->reader->class->destroy (src->reader);
free (file_name);
free (src->buffer);
while (!deque_is_empty (&src->deque))
projects / pspp / blobdiff