[![License: MIT](](
![Stability: experimental](


More documentation will be added, for now please refer to the documentation of
[Xpeg](, a Nim implementation of a similar PEG

## Introduction

Xpeg is a pure Elixir pattern matching library. It provides macros to compile
patterns and grammars (PEGs) to Elixir function which will parse a string and
collect selected parts of the input. PEGs are not unlike regular expressions,
but offer more power and flexibility, and have less ambiguities. (More about 
PEGs on [Wikipedia](

               ╭───────»──────╮   │              ╭───────»──────╮   │
String_body o──┴─┬─[Escape]─┬─┴─»─┴─┬─┬─{:-}─┬─»─┴─┬─[Escape]─┬─┴─┬─┴──o
                 ╰─────«────╯       │ ╰───«──╯     ╰─────«────╯   │

Some use cases where Xpeg is useful are configuration or data file parsers,
robust protocol implementations, input validation, lexing of programming
languages or domain specific languages.

Some Xpeg highlights:

- Grammar definitions and Elixir code can be freely mixed. Nim code is embedded
  using the normal Nim code block syntax, and does not disrupt the grammar

- Xpeg-generated parsers can be used both at run and at compile time.

- Xpeg offers various methods for tracing, optimizing and debugging your

- Xpeg can draw cool diagrams.

## Installation

def deps do
    {:xpeg, "~> 0.8.0"}

## Quickstart

Here is a simple example showing the power of Xpeg: The macro `peg` compiles a
grammar definition into a `parser` functiion, which is used to match a string and
place the key-value pairs into a list of tuples:

p = Xpeg.peg Dict do
  Dict <- Pair * star("," * Pair) * !1
  Pair <- Word * "=" * Number * fn [a,b|cs] -> [{b,a}|cs] end
  Word <- str(+{'a'..'z'})
  Number <- int(+{'0'..'9'})

Xpeg.match(p, "grass=4,horse=1,star=2")


[{"star", 2}, {"horse", 1}, {"grass", 4}]

## Usage

The basic operation consists of the provided _grammar_, which consists of a set
of named _rules_. A name is an elixir atom, in the form `:name` or `Name`,
whichever you prefer.  A rule is made up of a number of _atoms_ (not to be
confused with Elixirs atoms. I should probably find another name for this) and
_operators_, which are executed to match the input string.  Rules can also call
into other rules, allowing for recursive grammars.

For example, the grammar below matches a comma-separated list of words

p = peg List do
  List <- Word * star( "," * Word )
  Word <- +{'a'..'z'}

- The `List` rule matches one `Word`, followed by zero or more (`star(P)`)
  times a `,` followed by a `Word`
- The `Word` rule matches one-or-more (`+P`) times the set of characters (`{}`)
  consisting of all letters from `'a'` to `'z'`

During the execution of the grammar, matching parts of the subject strings can
be _captured_ with the `str()` operator. All captures are stored on the
`captures` list inside the parser state. This list is returned by the `match()`
function, but can also be used by in-grammar functions to perform conversions
or transformations.

Below is the same grammar as above, but in this case it captures all
the individual `Word`s:

p = peg List do
  List <- Word * star( "," * Word )
  Word <- str(+{'a'..'z'})

match(p, "one,two,three")

The above will return these following list of captures:
["three", "two", "one"]

A powerful feature allows mixing of Elixir functions with the grammar, which
can be used to perform transformations of the captures or build abstract syntax
trees (ASTs) on-the-fly.

For example, the grammar above is changed to match numbers instead of words,
and a conversion function is called after every matching number that
converts the last captured value on the `captures` list to an integer:

p = peg List do
  List <- Word * star( "," * Word )
  Word <- cap(+{'0'..'9'}) * 
    fn [v|cs] -> 

match(p, "123,42,31415")

which results in the following captures:

[31415, 42, 123]

More elaborate examples can be found in [examples_test.exs](/test/examples_test.exs),
including a parser for arithmatic expressions and a full JSON parser.

## Grammars

The `peg` macro provides a method to define (recursive) grammars. The first
argument is the name of initial patterns, followed by a list of named patterns.
Patterns can now refer to other patterns by name, allowing for recursion.

The order in which the grammar patterns are defined affects the generated
parser. Although Xpeg could always reorder, this is a design choice to give the
user more control over the generated parser:

- when a pattern P1 refers to pattern P2 which is defined before P1, P2 will
  be inlined in P1. This increases the generated code size, but generally
  improves performance.

- when a pattern P1 refers to pattern P2 which is defined after P1, P2 will be
  generated as a subroutine which gets called from P1. This will reduce code
  size, but might also result in a slower parser.

## Syntax

The Xpeg syntax is similar to normal PEG notation, but some changes were made
to allow the grammar to be properly parsed by the Elixir compiler:

- Xpeg uses prefix operators instead of suffix operators for `+`, `-`
- Elixir does not support the `*` and `?` prefix operators, so instead
  `star(P)` and `opt(P)` are used
- The explicit `*` infix operator is used for concatenation

Xpeg patterns and grammars can be composed of the following parts:


      0              # matches always and consumes nothing
      1              # matches any character
      n              # matches exactly n characters
     'x'             # matches literal character 'x'
     "xyz"           # matches literal string "xyz"
     {'x'..'y'}      # matches any character in the range from 'x'..'y'
     {'x','y','z'}   # matches any character from the set


      P1 * P2        # concatenation
      P1 | P2        # ordered choice
      P1 - P2        # matches P1 if P2 does not match
     (P)             # grouping
     !P              # matches everything but P
     &P              # matches P without consuming input
  opt(P)             # matches P zero or one times
 star(P)             # matches P zero or more times
     +P              # matches P one or more times
      P[n]           # matches P n times
      P[m..n]        # matches P m to n times
     @P              # searches for P


  str(P)             # Adds the matched string to the capture list
  int(P)             # Adds the matched integer to the capture list
float(P)             # Adds the matched float to the capture list

Elixir function:

    fn(captures)    # Elixir function for transormations


## Performance

Generated parsers will typically never reach the spead of a hand-crafted and
fine tuned parser for a specific grammar.  Having said that, Xpeg parsers can
still be pretty fast; for example, the JSON parser from the examples runs at
approximately 2/3 of the speed of the Poison JSON parser, which is said to be

## Tracing and debugging

### Syntax diagrams

When passing the option `:dump_graph` to `Xpeg.peg()`, Xpeg will dump syntax
diagrams (also known as railroad diagrams) for all parsed rules.

Syntax diagrams are sometimes helpful to understand or debug a grammar, or to
get more insight in a grammars' complexity.

               ╭───────»──────╮   │              ╭───────»──────╮   │
String_body o──┴─┬─[Escape]─┬─┴─»─┴─┬─┬─{:-}─┬─»─┴─┬─[Escape]─┬─┴─┬─┴──o
                 ╰─────«────╯       │ ╰───«──╯     ╰─────«────╯   │

- Optionals (?) are indicated by a forward arrow overhead.
- Repeats ('+') are indicated by a backwards arrow underneath.
- Non-terminals are printed in square brackets.

### Tracing

When passing the flag `:dump_ir` to Xpeg.peg, it will print the IR representation of the
parsed grammar at compile time. The option `:trace` will print the IR instructions and the matched subject
string during parsing - this will dramatically slow down the parsing, however.

For example, the following program:

Xpeg.peg Line, trace: true, dump_ir: true do
 Space <- ' '
 Line <- Word * star(Space * Word)
 Word <- +{'a'..'z'}

will output the following intermediate representation at compile time. From the
IR it can be seen that the space rule has been inlined in the line rule, but
that the `Word` rule has been emitted as a subroutine which gets called from

  0 :call 6
  1 :choice 5 1
  2 :chr 32
  3 :call 6
  4 :commit
  5 :return
  6 :set 'abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz'
  7 :span 'abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz'
  8 :return
  fail :fail

At runtime, the following trace is generated. The trace consists of a number of columns:

- The current instruction pointer, which maps to the compile time dump.
- The substring of the subject.
- The instruction being executed.

    0 | 'one two'              | {:call, 6} 
    6 | 'one two'              | {:set, 'abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz'} 
    7 | 'ne two'               | {:span, 'abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz'} 
    7 | 'e two'                | {:span, 'abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz'} 
    7 | ' two'                 | {:span, 'abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz'} 
    8 | ' two'                 | {:return} 
    1 | ' two'                 | {:choice, 5, 1} 
    2 | ' two'                 | {:chr, 32} 
    3 | 'two'                  | {:call, 6} 
    6 | 'two'                  | {:set, 'abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz'} 
    7 | 'wo'                   | {:span, 'abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz'} 
    7 | 'o'                    | {:span, 'abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz'} 
    7 | []                     | {:span, 'abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz'} 
    8 | []                     | {:return} 
    4 | []                     | {:commit} 
    1 | []                     | {:choice, 5, 1} 
    2 | []                     | {:chr, 32} 
 fail | []                     | {:fail} 
    5 | []                     | {:return}

The exact meaning of the IR instructions is not discussed here


- I do not like the `star()` and `opt()` syntax of the AST, but given the limited
  support for prefix operators in Elixir I'm not yet sure how to make this better