1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
703
704
705
706
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742
743
744
745
746
747
748
749
750
751
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
760
761
762
763
764
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
780
781
782
783
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
791
792
793
794
795
796
797
798
799
800
801
802
803
804
805
806
807
808
809
810
811
812
813
814
815
816
817
818
819
820
821
822
823
824
825
826
827
828
829
830
831
832
833
834
835
836
837
838
839
840
841
842
843
844
845
846
847
848
849
850
851
852
853
854
855
856
857
858
859
860
861
862
863
864
865
866
867
868
869
870
871
872
873
874
875
876
877
878
879
880
881
882
883
884
885
886
887
888
889
890
891
892
893
894
895
896
897
898
899
900
901
902
903
904
905
906
907
908
909
910
911
912
913
914
915
916
917
918
919
920
921
922
923
924
925
926
927
928
929
930
931
932
933
934
935
936
937
938
939
940
941
942
943
944
945
946
947
948
949
950
951
952
953
954
955
956
957
958
959
960
961
962
963
964
965
966
967
968
969
|
<html>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<center>
<img src="gf-logo.gif">
<h1>The Module System of GF</h1>
<p>
8/4/2005 - 10/4
<p>
<a href="http://www.cs.chalmers.se/~aarne">Aarne Ranta</a>
</center>
A GF grammar consists of a set of <b>modules</b>, which can be
combined in different ways to build different grammars.
There are several different <b>types of modules</b>:
<ul>
<li> <tt>abstract</tt>
<li> <tt>concrete</tt>
<li> <tt>resource</tt>
<li> <tt>interface</tt>
<li> <tt>instance</tt>
<li> <tt>incomplete concrete</tt>
<li> <tt>transfer</tt>
</ul>
We will go through the module types in this order, which is also
their order of "importance" from the most frequently used to
the more esoteric/advanced ones.
<p>
This document is meant as an appendix to the GF tutorial, and
presupposes knowledge of GF judgements and expressions. It aims
just to tell what module system adds to the old functionality;
some information is repeated to give understanding on how the
module system relates to the already familiar uses of GF grammars.
<h2>The principal module types</h2>
<h3>Abstract syntax</h3>
Any GF grammar that is used in an application
will probably contain at least one module
of the <tt>abstract</tt> module type. Here is an example of
such a module, defining a fragment of propositional logic.
<pre>
abstract Logic = {
cat Prop ;
fun Conj : Prop -> Prop -> Prop ;
fun Disj : Prop -> Prop -> Prop ;
fun Impl : Prop -> Prop -> Prop ;
fun Falsum : Prop ;
}
</pre>
The <b>name</b> of this module is <tt>Logic</tt>.
<p>
An <tt>abstract</tt> module defines an <b>abstract syntax</b>, which
is a language-independent representation of a fragment of language.
It consists of two kinds of <b>judgements</b>:
<ul>
<li> <tt>cat</tt> judgements telling what <b>categories</b> there are
(types of abstract syntax trees)
<li> <tt>fun</tt> judgements telling what <b>functions</b> there are
(to build abstract syntax trees)
</ul>
There can also be <tt>def</tt> and <tt>data</tt> judgements in an
abstract syntax.
<h4>Compilation of abstract syntax</h4>
The GF grammar compiler expects to find the module <tt>Logic</tt> in a file named
<tt>Logic.gf</tt>. When the compiler is run, it produces
another file, named <tt>Logic.gfc</tt>. This file is in the
format called <b>canonical GF</b>, which is the "machine language"
of GF. Next time that the module <tt>Logic</tt> is needed in
compiling a grammar, it can be read from the compiled (<tt>gfc</tt>)
file instead of the source (<tt>gf</tt>) file, unless the source
has been changed after the compilation.
<h3>Concrete syntax</h3>
In order for a GF grammar to describe a concrete language, the abstract
syntax must be completed with a <b>concrete syntax</b> of it.
For this purpose, we use modules of type <tt>concrete</tt>: for instance,
<pre>
concrete LogicEng of Logic = {
lincat Prop = {s : Str} ;
lin Conj a b = {s = a.s ++ "and" ++ b.s} ;
lin Disj a b = {s = a.s ++ "or" ++ b.s} ;
lin Impl a b = {s = "if" ++ a.s ++ "then" ++ b.s} ;
lin Falsum = {s = ["we have a contradiction"]} ;
}
</pre>
The module <tt>LogicEng</tt> is a concrete syntax <tt>of</tt> the
abstract syntax <tt>Logic</tt>. The GF grammar compiler checks that
the concrete is valid with respect to the abstract syntax <tt>of</tt>
which it is claimed to be. The validity requires that there has to be
<ul>
<li> a <tt>lincat</tt> judgement for each <tt>cat</tt> judgement, telling what the
<b>linearization types</b> of categories are
<li> a <tt>lin</tt> judgement for each <tt>fun</tt> judgement, telling what the
<b>linearization functions</b> corresponding to functions are
</ul>
Validity also requires that the linearization functions defined by
<tt>lin</tt> judgements are type-correct with respect to the
linearization types of the arguments and value of the function.
<p>
There can also be <tt>lindef</tt> and <tt>printname</tt> judgements in a
concrete syntax.
<h3>Top-level grammar</h3>
When a <tt>concrete</tt> module is successfully compiled, a <tt>gfc</tt>
file is produced in the same way as for <tt>abstract</tt> modules. The
pair of an <tt>abstract</tt> and a corresponding <tt>concrete</tt> module
is a <b>top-level grammar</b>, which can be used in the GF system to
perform various tasks. The most fundamental tasks are
<ul>
<li> <b>linearization</b>: take an abstract syntax tree and find the corresponding string
<li> <b>parsing</b>: take a string and find the corresponding abstract syntax
trees (which can be zero, one, or many)
</ul>
In the current grammar, infinitely many trees and strings are recognized, although
no very interesting ones. For example, the tree
<pre>
Impl (Disj Falsum Falsum) Falsum
</pre>
has the linearization
<pre>
if we have a contradiction or we have a contradiction then we have a contradiction
</pre>
which in turn can be parsed uniquely as that tree.
<h4>Compiling top-level grammars</h4>
When GF compiles the module <tt>LogicEng</tt> it also has to compile
all modules that it <b>depends</b> on (in this case, just <tt>Logic</tt>).
The compilation process starts with dependency analysis to find
all these modules, recursively, starting from the explicitly imported one.
The compiler then reads either <tt>gf</tt> or <tt>gfc</tt> files, in
a dependency order. The decision on which files to read depends on
time stamps and dependencies in a natural way, so that all and only
those modules that have to be compiled are compiled. (This behaviour can
be changed with flags, see below.)
<h4>Using top-level grammars</h4>
To use a top-level grammar in the GF system, one uses the <tt>import</tt>
command (short name <tt>i</tt>). For instance,
<pre>
i LogicEng.gf
</pre>
It is also possible to specify the imported grammar(s) on the command
line when invoking GF:
<pre>
gf LogicEng.gf
</pre>
Various <b>compilation flags</b> can be added to both ways of compiling a module:
<ul>
<li> <tt>-src</tt> forces compilation form source files
<li> <tt>-v</tt> gives more verbose information on compilation
<li> <tt>-s</tt> makes compilation silent (except if it fails with an error message)
</ul>
Importing a grammar makes it visible in GF's <b>internal state</b>. To see
what modules are available, use the command <tt>print_options</tt> (<tt>po</tt>).
You can empty the state with the command <tt>empty</tt> (<tt>e</tt>); this is
needed if you want to read in grammars with a different abstract syntax
than the current one without exiting GF.
<p>
Grammar modules can reside in different directories. They can then be found
by means of a <b>search path</b>, which is a flag such as
<pre>
-path=.:../prelude
</pre>
given to the <tt>import</tt> command or the shell command invoking GF.
(It can also be defined in the grammar file; see below.) The compiler
writes every <tt>gfc</tt> file in the same directory as the corresponding
<tt>gf</tt> file.
<p>
Parsing and linearization can be performed with the <tt>parse</tt>
(<tt>p</tt>) and <tt>linearize</tt> (<tt>l</tt>) commands, respectively.
For instance,
<pre>
> l Impl (Disj Falsum Falsum) Falsum
if we have a contradiction or we have a contradiction then we have a contradiction
> p -cat=Prop "we have a contradiction"
Falsum
</pre>
Notice that the <tt>parse</tt> command needs the parsing category
as a flag. This necessary since a grammar can have several
possible parsing categories ("entry points").
<h3>Multilingual grammar</h3>
One <tt>abstract</tt> syntax can have several <tt>concrete</tt> syntaxes.
Here are two new ones for <tt>Logic</tt>:
<pre>
concrete LogicFre of Logic = {
lincat Prop = {s : Str} ;
lin Conj a b = {s = a.s ++ "et" ++ b.s} ;
lin Disj a b = {s = a.s ++ "ou" ++ b.s} ;
lin Impl a b = {s = "si" ++ a.s ++ "alors" ++ b.s} ;
lin Falsum = {s = ["nous avons une contradiction"]} ;
}
concrete LogicSymb of Logic = {
lincat Prop = {s : Str} ;
lin Conj a b = {s = "(" ++ a.s ++ "&" ++ b.s ++ ")"} ;
lin Disj a b = {s = "(" ++ a.s ++ "v" ++ b.s ++ ")"} ;
lin Impl a b = {s = "(" ++ a.s ++ "->" ++ b.s ++ ")"} ;
lin Falsum = {s = "_|_"} ;
}
</pre>
The four modules <tt>Logic</tt>, <tt>LogicEng</tt>, <tt>LogicFre</tt>, and
<tt>LogicSymb</tt> together form a <b>multilingual grammar</b>, in which
it is possible to perform parsing and linearization with respect to any
of the concrete syntaxes. As a combination of parsing and linearization,
one can also perform <b>translation</b> from one language to another.
(By <b>language</b> we mean the set of expressions generated by one
concrete syntax.)
<h4>Using multilingual grammars</h4>
Any combination of abstract syntax and corresponding concrete syntaxes
is thus a multilingual grammar. With many languages and other enrichments
(as described below), a multilingual grammar easily grows to the size of
tens of modules. The grammar developer, having finished her job, can
package the result in a <b>multilingual canonical grammar</b>, a file
with the suffix <tt>.gfcm</tt>. For instance, to compile the set of grammars
described by now, the following sequence of GF commands can be used:
<pre>
i LogicEng.gf
i LogicFre.gf
i LogicSymb.gf
pm | wf logic.gfcm
</pre>
The "end user" of the grammar only needs the file <tt>logic.gfcm</tt> to
access all the functionality of the multilingual grammar. It can be
imported in the GF system in the same way as <tt>.gf</tt> files. But
it can also be used in the <b>Embedded Java Interpreter for GF</b> to
build Java programs of which the multilingual grammar functionalities
(linearization, parsing, translation) form a part.
<p>
In a multilingual grammar, the concrete syntax module names work as
names of languages that can be selected for linearization and parsing:
<pre>
> l -lang=LogicFre Impl Falsum Falsum
si nous avons une contradiction alors nous avons une contradiction
> l -lang=LogicSymb Impl Falsum Falsum
( _|_ -> _|_ )
> p -cat=Prop -lang=LogicSymb "( _|_ & _|_ )"
Conj Falsum Falsum
</pre>
The option <tt>-multi</tt> gives linearization to all languages:
<pre>
> l -multi Impl Falsum Falsum
if we have a contradiction then we have a contradiction
si nous avons une contradiction alors nous avons une contradiction
( _|_ -> _|_ )
</pre>
Translation can be obtained by using a <b>pipe</b> from a parser
to a linearizer:
<pre>
> p -cat=Prop -lang=LogicSymb "( _|_ & _|_ )" | l -lang=LogicEng
if we have a contradiction then we have a contradiction
</pre>
<h4>Exercise</h4>
Write yet another concrete syntax of <tt>Logic</tt>, for
a language or symbolic notation of your choice.
<h3>Resource modules</h3>
The <tt>concrete</tt> modules shown above would look much nicer if
we used the main idea of functional programming: avoid repetitive
code by using <b>functions</b> that capture repeated patterns of
expressions. A collection of such functions can be a valuable
<b>resource</b> for a programmer, reusable in many different
top-level grammars. Thus we introduce the <tt>resource</tt>
module type, with the first example
<pre>
resource Util = {
oper SS : Type = {s : Str} ;
oper ss : Str -> SS = \s -> {s = s} ;
oper paren : Str -> Str = \s -> "(" ++ s ++ ")" ;
oper infix : Str -> SS -> SS -> SS = \h,x,y ->
ss (x.s ++ h ++ y.s) ;
oper infixp : Str -> SS -> SS -> SS = \h,x,y ->
ss (paren (infix h x y)) ;
}
</pre>
Modules of <tt>resource</tt> type have two forms of judgement:
<ul>
<li> <tt>oper</tt> defining auxiliary operations
<li> <tt>param</tt> defining parameter types
</ul>
A <tt>resource</tt> can be used in a <tt>concrete</tt> (or another
<tt>resource</tt>) by <tt>open</tt>ing it. This means that
all operations (and parameter types) defined in the resource
module become usable in module that opens it. For instance,
we can rewrite the module <tt>LogicSymb</tt> much more concisely:
<pre>
concrete LogicSymb of Logic = open Util in {
lincat Prop = SS ;
lin Conj = infixp "&" ;
lin Disj = infixp "v" ;
lin Impl = infixp "->" ;
lin Falsum = ss "_|_" ;
}
</pre>
What happens when this variant of <tt>LogicSymb</tt> is
compiled is that the <tt>oper</tt>-defined constants
of <tt>Util</tt> are <b>inlined</b> in the
right-hand-sides of the judgements of <tt>LogicSymb</tt>,
and these expressions are <b>partially evaluated</b>, i.e.
computed as far as possible. The generated <tt>gfc</tt> file
will look just like the file generated for the first version
of <tt>LogicSymb</tt> - at least, it will do the same job.
<p>
Several <tt>resource</tt> modules can be <tt>open</tt>ed
at the same time. If the modules contain same names, the
conflict can be resolved by <b>qualified</b> opening and
reference. For instance,
<pre>
concrete LogicSymb of Logic = open Util, Prelude in { ...
} ;
</pre>
(where <tt>Prelude</tt> is a standard library of GF) brings
into scope two definitions of the constant <tt>SS</tt>.
To specify which one is used, you can write
<tt>Util.SS</tt> or <tt>Prelude.SS</tt> instead of just <tt>SS</tt>.
You can also introduce abbreviations to avoid long qualifiers, e.g.
<pre>
concrete LogicSymb of Logic = open (U=Util), (P=Prelude) in { ...
} ;
</pre>
which means that you can write <tt>U.SS</tt> and <tt>P.SS</tt>.
<h4>Compiling resource modules</h4>
The compilation of a <tt>resource</tt> module differs
from the compilation of <tt>abstract</tt> and
<tt>concrete</tt> modules because <tt>oper</tt> operations
do not in general have values in <tt>gfc</tt>. A <tt>gfc</tt>
file <i>is</i> generated, but it contains only
<tt>param</tt> judgements (also recall that <tt>oper</tt>s
are inlined in their top-level use sites, so it is not
necessary to save them in the compiled grammar).
However, since computing the operations over and over
again can be time comsuming, and since type checking
<tt>resource</tt> modules also takes time, a third kind
of file is generated for resource modules: a <tt>.gfr</tt>
file. This file is written in the GF source code notation,
but it is type checked and type annotated, and <tt>oper</tt>s
are computed as far as possible.
<p>
If you look at any <tt>gfc</tt> or <tt>gfr</tt> file generated
by the GF compiler, you see that all names have been replaced by
their qualified variants. This is an important first step (after parsing)
the compiler does. As for the commands in the GF shell, some output
qualified names and some not. The difference does not always result
from firm principles.
<h4>Using resource modules</h4>
The typical use is through <tt>open</tt> in a
<tt>concrete</tt> module, which means that
<tt>resource</tt> modules are not imported on their own.
However, in the developing and testing phase of grammars, it
can be useful to evaluate <tt>oper</tt>s with different
arguments. To prevent them from being thrown away after inlining, the
<tt>-retain</tt> option can be used:
<pre>
> i -retain Util.gf
</pre>
The command <tt>compute_concrete</tt> (<tt>cc</tt>)
can now be used for evaluating expressions that may contain
operations defined in <tt>Util</tt>:
<pre>
> cc ss (paren "foo")
{s = "(" ++ "foo" ++ ")"}
</pre>
To find out what <tt>oper</tt>s are available for a given type,
the command <tt>show_operations</tt> (<tt>so</tt>) can be used:
<pre>
> so SS
Util.ss : Str -> SS ;
Util.infix : Str -> SS -> SS -> SS ;
Util.infixp : Str -> SS -> SS -> SS ;
</pre>
<h4>Exercise</h4>
Rewrite the modules <tt>LogicEng</tt> and <tt>LogicFre</tt>
by making use of the resource.
<h3>Inheritance</h3>
The most characteristic modularity of GF lies in the division of
grammars into <tt>abstract</tt>, <tt>concrete</tt>, and
<tt>resource</tt> modules. This permits writing multilingual
grammar and sharing the maximum of code between different
languages.
<p>
In addition to this special kind of modularity, GF provides <b>inheritance</b>,
which is familiar from other programming languages (in particular,
object-oriented ones). Inheritance means that a module inherits all
judgements from another module; we also say that it <b>extends</b>
the other module. Inheritance is useful to divide big grammars into
smaller units, and also to reuse the same units in different bigger
grammars.
<p>
The first example of inheritance is for abstract syntax. Let us
extend the module <tt>Logic</tt> to <tt>Arithmetic</tt>:
<pre>
abstract Arithmetic = Logic ** {
cat Nat ;
fun Even : Nat -> Prop ;
fun Odd : Nat -> Prop ;
fun Zero : Nat ;
fun Succ : Nat -> Nat ;
}
</pre>
In parallel with the extension of the abstract syntax
<tt>Logic</tt> to <tt>Arithmetic</tt>, we can extend
the concrete syntax <tt>LogicEng</tt> to <tt>ArithmeticEng</tt>:
<pre>
concrete ArithmeticEng of Arithmetic = LogicEng ** open Util in {
lincat Nat = SS ;
lin Even x = ss (x.s ++ "is" ++ "even") ;
lin Odd x = ss (x.s ++ "is" ++ "odd") ;
lin Zero = ss "zero" ;
lin Succ x = ss ("the" ++ "successor" ++ "of" ++ x.s) ;
}
</pre>
Another extension of <tt>Logic</tt> is <tt>Geometry</tt>,
<pre>
abstract Geometry = Logic ** {
cat Point ;
cat Line ;
fun Incident : Point -> Line -> Prop ;
}
</pre>
The corresponding concrete syntax is left as exercise.
<p>
Inheritance can be <b>multiple</b>, which means that a module
may extend many modules at the same time. Suppose, for instance,
that we want to build a module for mathematics covering both
arithmetic and geometry, and the underlying logic. We then write
<pre>
abstract Mathematics = Arithmetic, Geometry ** {
} ;
</pre>
We could of course add some new judgements in this module, but
it is not necessary to do so.
<p>
The module <tt>Mathematics</tt> also shows that it is possibe
to extend a module already built by extension. The correctness
criterion for extensions is that the same name
(<tt>cat</tt>, <tt>fun</tt>, <tt>oper</tt>, or <tt>param</tt>)
may not be defined twice in the resulting union of names.
That the names defined in <tt>Logic</tt> are "inherited twice"
by <tt>Mathematics</tt> (via both <tt>Arithmetic</tt> and
<tt>Geometry</tt>) is no violation of this rule; the usual
problems of multiple inheritance do not arise, since
the definitions of inherited constants cannot be changed.
<h4>Compiling inheritance</h4>
Inherited judgements are not copied into the inheriting modules.
Instead, an <b>indirection</b> is created for each inherited name,
as can be seen by looking into the generated <tt>gfc</tt> (and
<tt>gfr</tt>) files. Thus for instance the names
<pre>
Mathematics.Prop Arithmetic.Prop Geometry.Prop Logic.Prop
</pre>
all refer to the same category, declared in the module
<tt>Logic</tt>.
<h4>Inspecting grammar hierarchies</h4>
The command <tt>visualize_graph</tt> (<tt>vg</tt>) shows the
dependency graph in the current GF shell state. The graph can
also be saved in a file and used e.g. in documentation, by the
command <tt>print_multi -graph</tt> (<tt>pm -graph</tt>).
<h3>Reuse of top-level grammars as resources</h3>
Top-level grammars have a straightforward translation to
<tt>resource</tt> modules. The translation concerns
pairs of abstract-concrete judgements:
<pre>
cat C ; ===> oper C : Type = T ;
lincat C = T ;
fun f : A ; ===> oper f : A = t ;
lin f = t ;
</pre>
Due to this translation, a <tt>concrete</tt> module
can be <tt>open</tt>ed in the same way as a
<tt>resource</tt> module; the translation is done
on the fly (it is computationally very cheap).
<p>
Modular grammar engineering often means that some grammarians
focus on the semantics of the domain whereas others take care
of linguistic details. Thus a typical reuse opens a
linguistically oriented <b>resource grammar</b>,
<pre>
abstract Resource = {
cat S ; NP ; A ;
fun PredA : NP -> A -> S ;
}
concrete ResourceEng of Resource = {
lincat S = ... ;
lin PredA = ... ;
}
</pre>
The <b>application grammar</b>, instead of giving linearizations
explicitly, just reduces them to categories and functions in the
resource grammar:
<pre>
concrete ArithmeticEng of Arithmetic = LogicEng ** open ResourceEng in {
lincat Nat = NP ;
lin Even x = PredA x (regA "even") ;
}
</pre>
If the resource grammar is only capable of generating grammatically
correct expressions, then the grammaticality of the application
grammar is also guaranteed: the type checker of GF is used as
grammar checker.
To guarantee distinctions between categories that have
the same linearization type, the actual translation used
in GF adds to every linearization type and linearization
a <b>lock field</b>,
<pre>
cat C ; ===> oper C : Type = T ** {lock_C : {}} ;
lincat C = T ;
fun f : C_1 ... C_n -> C ; ===> oper f : C_1 ... C_n -> C = \x_1,...,x_n ->
lin f = t ; t x_1 ... x_n ** {lock_C = <>};
</pre>
(Notice that the latter translation is type-correct because of
record subtyping, which means that <tt>t</tt> can ignore the
lock fields of its arguments.) An application grammarian who
only uses resource grammar categories and functions never
needs to write these lock fields herself. Having to do so
serves as a warning that the grammaticality guarantee given
by the resource grammar no longer holds.
<h2>Additional module types</h2>
<h3>Interfaces, instances, and incomplete grammars</h3>
One difference between top-level grammars and <tt>resource</tt>
modules is that the former systematically separete the
declarations of categories and functions from their definitions.
In the reuse translation creating and <tt>oper</tt> judgement,
the declaration coming from the <tt>abstract</tt> module is put
together with the definition coming from the <tt>concrete</tt>
module.
<p>
However, the separation of declarations and definitions is so
useful a notion that GF also has specific modules types that
<tt>resource</tt> modules into two parts. In this splitting,
an <tt>interface</tt> module corresponds to an abstract syntax,
in giving the declarations of operations (and parameter types).
For instance, a generic markup interface would look as follows:
<pre>
interface Markup = open Util in {
oper Boldface : Str -> Str ;
oper Heading : Str -> Str ;
oper markupSS : (Str -> Str) -> SS -> SS = \f,r ->
ss (f r.s) ;
}
</pre>
The definitions of the constants declared in an <tt>interface</tt>
are given in an <tt>instance</tt> module (which is always <tt>of</tt>
an interface, in the same way as a <tt>concrete</tt> is always
<tt>of</tt> an abstract). The following <tt>instance</tt>s
define markup in HTML and latex.
<pre>
instance MarkupHTML of Markup = open Util in {
oper Boldface s = "<b>" ++ s ++ "</b>" ;
oper Heading s = "<h2>" ++ s ++ "</h2>" ;
}
instance MarkupLatex of Markup = open Util in {
oper Boldface s = "\\textbf{" ++ s ++ "}" ;
oper Heading s = "\\section{" ++ s ++ "}" ;
}
</pre>
Notice that both <tt>interface</tt>s and <tt>instance</tt>s may
<tt>open</tt> <tt>resource</tt>s (and also reused top-level grammars).
An <tt>interface</tt> may moreover define some of the operations it
declares; these definitions are inherited by all instances and cannot
be changed in them. Inheritance by module extension
is possible, as always, between modules of the same type.
<h4>Using an interface</h4>
An <tt>interface</tt> or an <tt>instance</tt>
can be <tt>open</tt>ed in
a <tt>concrete</tt> using the same syntax as when opening
a <tt>resource</tt>. For an <tt>instance</tt>, the semantics
is the same as when opening the definitions together with
the type signatures - one can think of an <tt>interface</tt>
and an <tt>instance</tt> of it together forming an ordinary
<tt>resource</tt>. Opening an <tt>interface</tt>, however,
is different: functions that are only declared without
having a definition cannot be compiled (inlined); neither
can functions whose definitions depend on undefined functions.
<p>
A module that <tt>open</tt>s an <tt>interface</tt> is therefore
<b>incomplete</b>, and has to be <b>completed</b> with an
<tt>instance</tt> of the interface to become complete. To make
this situation clear, GF requires any module that opens an
<tt>interface</tt> to be marked as <tt>incomplete</tt>. Thus
the module
<pre>
incomplete concrete DocMarkup of Doc = open Markup in {
...
}
</pre>
uses the interface <tt>Markup</tt> to place markup in
chosen places in its linearization rules, but the
implementation of markup - whether in HTML or in LaTeX - is
left unspecified. This is a powerful way of sharing
the code of a whole module with just differences in
the definitions of some constants.
<p>
Another terminology for <tt>incomplete</tt> modules is
<b>parametrized modules</b> or <b>functors</b>.
The <tt>interface</tt> gives the list of parameters
that the functor depends on.
<h4>Instantiating an interface</h4>
To complete an <tt>incomplete</tt> module, each <tt>inteface</tt>
that it opens has to be provided an <tt>instance</tt>. The following
syntax is used for this:
<pre>
concrete DocHTML of Doc = DocMarkup with (Markup = MarkupHTML) ;
</pre>
Instantiation of <tt>Markup</tt> with <tt>MarkupLatex</tt> is
another one-liner.
<p>
If more interfaces than one are instantiated, a comma-separated
list of equations in parentheses is used, e.g.
<pre>
concrete RulesIta = CategoriesIta ** RulesRomance with
(TypesRomance = TypesIta), (SyntaxRomance = SyntaxIta) ;
</pre>
(an example from the GF resource grammar library, where languages for
Romance languages share two interfaces).
All interfaces that are <tt>open</tt>ed in the completed model
must be completed.
<p>
Notice that the completion of an <tt>incomplete</tt> module
may at the same time extend modules of the same type (which need
not be completions). But it cannot add new judgements.
<h4>Compiling interfaces, instances, and parametrized modules</h4>
Interfaces, instances, and parametric modules are purely a
front-end feature of GF: these module types do not exist in
the <tt>gfc</tt> and <tt>gfr</tt> formats. The compiler has
nevertheless to keep track of their dependencies and modification
times. Here is a summary of how they are compiled:
<ul>
<li> an <tt>interface</tt> is compiled into a <tt>resource</tt> with an empty body
<li> an <tt>instance</tt> is compiled into a <tt>resource</tt> in union with its
<tt>interface</tt>
<li> an <tt>incomplete</tt> module (<tt>concrete</tt> or <tt>resource</tt>) is compiled
into a module of the same type with an empty body
<li> a completion module (<tt>concrete</tt> or <tt>resource</tt>) is compiled
into a module of the same type by compiling its functor so that, instead of
each <tt>interface</tt>, its given <tt>instance</tt> is used
</ul>
This means that some generated code is duplicated, because those operations that
do have complete definitions in an <tt>interface</tt> are copied to each of
the <tt>instances</tt>.
<h3>Transfer modules</h3>
<b>Translation by transfer</b> means that syntax trees are manipulated
by non-compositional functions (<b>transfer rules</b>) between the
source and target languages. They are being introduce to GF as a module
type of its own, but their development is still in progress. What
will be available are at least <tt>fun</tt> and <tt>def</tt>
judgements, but more is needed. It has not yet been defined how
transfer modules are integrated in multilingual grammars, i.e.\
where in the grammar it is specified what transfer to use.
(Both GF and GFC have a syntax for transfer modules and
multilingual headers, but their compilation further than parsing
has not been implemented.)
<h2>Summary of module syntax and semantics</h2>
<h4>Abstract syntax modules</h4>
Syntax:
<p>
<tt>abstract</tt> A <tt>=</tt> (A<sub>1</sub>,...,A<sub>n</sub> <tt>**</tt>)?
<tt>{</tt>J<sub>1</sub> <tt>;</tt> ... <tt>;</tt> J<sub>m</sub> <tt>; }</tt>
<p>
where
<ul>
<li> i >= 0
<li> each <i>A<sub>i</sub></i> is itself an abstract module
<li> each <i>J<sub>i</sub></i> is a judgement of one of the forms
<tt>cat, fun, def, data</tt>
</ul>
Semantic conditions:
<ul>
<li> all names declared in each <i>A<sub>i</sub></i> and <i>A</i> must be distinct
</ul>
<h4>Concrete syntax modules</h4>
Syntax:
<p>
<tt>incomplete</tt>? <tt>concrete</tt> C <tt>of</tt> A <tt>=</tt>
(C<sub>1</sub>,...,C<sub>n</sub> <tt>**</tt>)?
(<tt>open</tt> O<sub>1</sub>,...,O<sub>k</sub> <tt>in</tt>)?
<tt>{</tt>J<sub>1</sub> <tt>;</tt> ... <tt>;</tt> J<sub>m</sub> <tt>; }</tt>
<p>
where
<ul>
<li> i >= 0
<li> <i>A</i> is an abstract module
<li> each <i>C<sub>i</sub></i> is a concrete module
<li> each <i>O<sub>i</sub></i> is an open specification, of one of the forms
<ul>
<li> <i>R</i>
<li> <tt>(</tt><i>Q</i><tt>=</tt><i>R</i><tt>)</tt>
</ul>
where <i>R</i> is a resource, instance, or concrete, and
<i>Q</i> is any identifier
<li> each <i>J<sub>i</sub></i> is a judgement of one of the forms
<tt>lincat, lin, lindef, printname</tt>
</ul>
<p>
If the modifier <tt>incomplete</tt> appears, then any <i>R</i> in
an open specification may also be an interface.
<p>
Semantic conditions:
<ul>
<li> each <tt>cat</tt> judgement in <i>A</i>
must have a corresponding, unique
<tt>lincat</tt> judgement in <i>C</i>
<li> each <tt>fun</tt> judgement in <i>A</i>
must have a corresponding, unique
<tt>lin</tt> judgement in <i>C</i>
</ul>
<h4>Resource modules</h4>
Syntax:
<p>
<tt>resource</tt> R <tt>=</tt>
(R<sub>1</sub>,...,R<sub>n</sub> <tt>**</tt>)?
(<tt>open</tt> O<sub>1</sub>,...,O<sub>k</sub> <tt>in</tt>)?
<tt>{</tt>J<sub>1</sub> <tt>;</tt> ... <tt>;</tt> J<sub>m</sub> <tt>; }</tt>
<p>
where
<ul>
<li> i >= 0
<li> each <i>R<sub>i</sub></i> is a resource module
<li> each <i>O<sub>i</sub></i> is an open specification, of one of the forms
<ul>
<li> <i>P</i>
<li> <tt>(</tt><i>Q</i><tt>=</tt><i>R</i><tt>)</tt>
</ul>
where <i>P</i> is a resource, instance, or concrete, and
<i>Q</i> is any identifier
<li> each <i>J<sub>i</sub></i> is a judgement of one of the forms
<tt>oper, param</tt>
</ul>
<p>
Semantic conditions:
<ul>
<li> all names declared in each <i>R<sub>i</sub></i> and <i>R</i> must be distinct
<li> all constants declared must have a definition
</ul>
<h4>Interface modules</h4>
Syntax:
<p>
<tt>interface</tt> R <tt>=</tt>
(R<sub>1</sub>,...,R<sub>n</sub> <tt>**</tt>)?
(<tt>open</tt> O<sub>1</sub>,...,O<sub>k</sub> <tt>in</tt>)?
<tt>{</tt>J<sub>1</sub> <tt>;</tt> ... <tt>;</tt> J<sub>m</sub> <tt>; }</tt>
<p>
where
<ul>
<li> i >= 0
<li> each <i>R<sub>i</sub></i> is an interface module
<li> each <i>O<sub>i</sub></i> is an open specification, of one of the forms
<ul>
<li> <i>P</i>
<li> <tt>(</tt><i>Q</i><tt>=</tt><i>R</i><tt>)</tt>
</ul>
where <i>P</i> is a resource, instance, or concrete, and
<i>Q</i> is any identifier
<li> each <i>J<sub>i</sub></i> is a judgement of one of the forms
<tt>oper, param</tt>
</ul>
<p>
Semantic conditions:
<ul>
<li> all names declared in each <i>R<sub>i</sub></i> and <i>R</i> must be distinct
</ul>
<h4>Instance modules</h4>
Syntax:
<p>
<tt>instance</tt> R <tt>of</tt> I <tt>=</tt>
(R<sub>1</sub>,...,R<sub>n</sub> <tt>**</tt>)?
(<tt>open</tt> O<sub>1</sub>,...,O<sub>k</sub> <tt>in</tt>)?
<tt>{</tt>J<sub>1</sub> <tt>;</tt> ... <tt>;</tt> J<sub>m</sub> <tt>; }</tt>
<p>
where
<ul>
<li> i >= 0
<li> <i>I</i> is an interface module
<li> each <i>R<sub>i</sub></i> is an instance module
<li> each <i>O<sub>i</sub></i> is an open specification, of one of the forms
<ul>
<li> <i>P</i>
<li> <tt>(</tt><i>Q</i><tt>=</tt><i>R</i><tt>)</tt>
</ul>
where <i>P</i> is a resource, instance, or concrete, and
<i>Q</i> is any identifier
<li> each <i>J<sub>i</sub></i> is a judgement of one of the forms
<tt>oper, param</tt>
</ul>
<p>
Semantic conditions:
<ul>
<li> all names declared in each <i>R<sub>i</sub></i>, <i>I</i>, and <i>R</i> must be distinct
<li> all constants declared in <i>I</i> must have a definition either in
<i>I</i> or <i>R</i>
</ul>
<h4>Instantiated concrete syntax modules</h4>
Syntax:
<p>
<tt>concrete</tt> C <tt>of</tt> A <tt>=</tt>
(C<sub>1</sub>,...,C<sub>n</sub> <tt>**</tt>)?
B
<tt>with</tt>
<tt>(</tt>I<sub>1</sub> <tt>=</tt>J<sub>1</sub><tt>),</tt> ...
<tt>, (</tt>I<sub>m</sub> <tt>=</tt>J<sub>m</sub><tt>) ;</tt>
<p>
where
<ul>
<li> i >= 0
<li> <i>A</i> is an abstract module
<li> each <i>C<sub>i</sub></i> is a concrete module
<li> <i>B</i> is an incomplete concrete syntax of <i>A</i>
<li> each <i>I<sub>i</sub></i> is an interface
<li> each <i>J<sub>i</sub></i> is an instance of <i>I<sub>i</sub></i>
</ul>
</body>
</html>
|
