busybox VS grammars-v4

Well.

Maybe you have better luck with the Busybox diff: https://github.com/brgl/busybox/blob/master/editors/diff.c

You can use busybox devmem to debug. The source code gives you an idea of how it works to write your own code.

You can fairly easily spot things like recursive search tree implementations in the wild.

Also, compilers and interpreters often recursion, and that goes to as many levels as the program requires.

Have you heard of a "recursive descent parser"? GNU C++ uses one (a huge source file written in C++, well over a megabyte long). This will recurse as deeply as the program's nesting goes; C++ programs often go to more than three levels of nesting. (There are some non-recursive hacks mixed in there, like some operator precedence parsing involving an explicit stack: Shunting-Yard or similar?)

https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/blob/master/gcc/cp/parser....

Let's switch over to embedded. Have you heard of BusyBox? BusyBox provides scaled down system utilities for embedded systems. It is very widely used.

BusyBox's "libb" internal library contains a function called "recursive_action" for walking file system trees. This is actually recursive, and frequently goes more than three levels deep in actual use:

https://github.com/brgl/busybox/blob/master/libbb/recursive_...

This is used by BusyBox programs like mdev (udev replacement) lsusb, lspci, chmod, ...

Also, HN isn't a good place to exhibit Lisp condescension/ignorance.

This is almost the same implementation you see in busybox's id command source

Perhaps the one from ANTLR's collection [0] is a good start (there are also others ANTLR VB6 grammars documented elsewhere). It does require knowing ANTLR, but that should be less effort for someone already familiar with language implementation, particularly, the visitor pattern (my favorite reference [1]).

[0] https://github.com/antlr/grammars-v4/tree/master/vb6

[1] https://craftinginterpreters.com/representing-code.html

Where is the SQLite test suite, please? I'd be very interested.

There are already SQL grammars, check https://github.com/antlr/grammars-v4 specifically in here I think https://github.com/antlr/grammars-v4/tree/master/sql I contributed to one of them, and I wrote my own for some personal work. Be warned, it's very involved, very complex and MSSQL is rather ill-defined.

Names bracket identifiers) in SQL are bloody awful. Sometimes square brackets are even compulsory, and why you can usually replace [...] with the SQL standard "..." , not always! Trust me, it gets worse.

I don't find antlr grammars to be brittle, and while they can lose in performance (by how much I don't know, perhaps quite considerably) they are very easy to maintain and I am very fortunate to have antlr to work with.

This grammar "library" was cited as an example of what the format could look like:.

https://github.com/antlr/grammars-v4

There is everything from assembly and C++ to glsl and scripting languages, arithmetic, games, and other weird formats.

> Which brings me to the other approach: steering the LLM's output __as it is generating tokens__

A relevant PR:

https://github.com/ggerganov/llama.cpp/pull/1773

The plan is to support arbitrary grammar files to constrain tokens as they are generated, like the ones here:

https://github.com/antlr/grammars-v4

Have a look at jooq - I know this has been used to rewrite SQL from one dialect to another, so it MUST be capable of collating code activity metrics. Look here. Otherwise, you might want to look into writing your own parser. ANTLR has a T-SQL dialect parser script here.

Find a Perl grammar file for ANTLR, like https://github.com/antlr/grammars-v4/tree/master/perl Save the grammar file as Perl.g4 in your project. Now, you can create the Kotlin program: import org.antlr.v4.runtime.* import org.antlr.v4.runtime.tree.ParseTree import java.io.File

Antlr is another option. You could generate a parser using the JSON antlr grammar.