rhai icon indicating copy to clipboard operation
rhai copied to clipboard

Parse error on multiplying two switch expressions

Open ttencate opened this issue 2 years ago • 18 comments

switch 1 {} * switch 2 {}
            ^ Unexpected '*' (line 1, position 13)

It works when I parenthesize the first expression:

(switch 1 {}) * switch 2 {}

ttencate avatar Aug 26 '22 07:08 ttencate

It is parsing it as a statement. This works...

let x = switch 1 {} * switch 2 {};

schungx avatar Aug 26 '22 07:08 schungx

That's what I thought. Why is there a non-expression switch statement anyway? 1; 2; 3; is a valid Rhai program, so clearly expressions can be statements too.

ttencate avatar Aug 26 '22 07:08 ttencate

That's what I thought. Why is there a non-expression switch statement anyway? 1; 2; 3; is a valid Rhai program, so clearly expressions can be statements too.

That's because most normal uses would use it as a statement (if also). Parsing it as an expression will incur an additional indirection every time it is encountered.

schungx avatar Aug 26 '22 07:08 schungx

It parses as a statement even inside an if expression:

let x = if true { switch 1 {} * switch 2 {} }
                              ^ Unexpected '*'

ttencate avatar Aug 26 '22 07:08 ttencate

Yes, that's because things inside a block are statements...

Why would you like to multiply two switch statements without assigning the result to anything?

schungx avatar Aug 26 '22 07:08 schungx

Why would you like to multiply two switch statements without assigning the result to anything?

I'm not saying you shouldn't or can't do it... but usually there is no great need.

schungx avatar Aug 26 '22 07:08 schungx

I'm using https://rhai.rs/book/engine/expressions.html. Edit: actually, I'm not using that anymore because for some reason it disallows if and switch expressions, but my primary purpose is still to evaluate expressions.

ttencate avatar Aug 26 '22 08:08 ttencate

ctually, I'm not using that anymore because for some reason it disallows if and switch expressions, but my primary purpose is still to evaluate expressions.

Yes, expressions are intended for real expressions without logic flow... so those are disabled.

schungx avatar Aug 26 '22 08:08 schungx

So you want to evaluate expressions which may consist of switch? That would be a bit involved, as the action blocks in a switch may be statements, so you'll end up running statements.

Unless it is also restricted to expressions there.

schungx avatar Aug 26 '22 08:08 schungx

I'm running some Rhai code to compute some value from some inputs. It's intended to be a pure function. I'm exposing no functions to the engine that have side effects, and the scope is truncated afterwards back to its initial size. Whether Rhai thinks my code is an "expression" or a "statement" or a "block of statements" or a "box of chocolates" does not matter to me :)

It's strange to me that if and switch expressions would be disabled while evaluating expressions. We can emulate the same behaviour by exposing a Rust function to the engine.

A ternary condition ? value_if_true : value_if_false, would that be considered a "real expression without logic flow"? How about (condition as f64) * (value_if_true) + (1.0 - (condition as f64)) * (value_if_false)?

ttencate avatar Aug 26 '22 10:08 ttencate

It's strange to me that if and switch expressions would be disabled while evaluating expressions. We can emulate the same behaviour by exposing a Rust function to the engine.

That's only because, when evaluating expressions, it is more likely to be an error when statements are encountered.

A ternary condition ? value_if_true : value_if_false, would that be considered a "real expression without logic flow"? How about (condition as f64) * (value_if_true) + (1.0 - (condition as f64)) * (value_if_false)?

In Rhai, a form of the tenary operator can be easily implemented as a custom syntax expressions... so yes it is an expression... I know that's not the most ideal...

What I can do is to add an advanced version of compile_expression such that it takes a parameter allowing statements. It is a very small change in the code (changing from false to true), but right now there is no out-of-the-box method to parse an expression with if/switch-expressions.

schungx avatar Aug 26 '22 10:08 schungx

That's okay. Since a statement block also evaluates to the last statement, I can just use that. It also helps with more complex expressions, e.g. if the user wants to introduce helper variables or eve functions. On second thought, I don't really understand the use case of eval_expression, but that might just be me :)

ttencate avatar Aug 26 '22 11:08 ttencate

I don't really understand the use case of eval_expression, but that might just be me :)

Different use cases. Many people don't need a full-blown scripting language. All they need is to evaluate expressions for customized config. They don't need scripts; they need only expressions.

For these cases, eval_expression is ideal for them as they don't have to worry about users throwing in loops and variable declarations etc.

schungx avatar Aug 26 '22 14:08 schungx

I can see how loops would open you up to DoS attacks if you are running this as e.g. a web service. But if and switch expressions can't be used for that. Nor can variable declarations.

ttencate avatar Aug 26 '22 14:08 ttencate

That's true, except that they both have blocks which can run anything inside...

schungx avatar Aug 26 '22 14:08 schungx

Maybe I can restrict the blocks to have only expressions... then it is OK to have if and switch in expressions...

schungx avatar Aug 26 '22 14:08 schungx

OK. I don't think it would be difficult to add. I'll add that support, then you can use Engine::eval_expression and both if and switch will work as long as their blocks contain only expressions.

schungx avatar Aug 26 '22 15:08 schungx

PR https://github.com/rhaiscript/rhai/pull/630 does this - it allows if and switch expressions.

schungx avatar Aug 27 '22 05:08 schungx

switch 1 {} * switch 2 {} will continue to cause a parse error because the first switch is parsed as a statement. This is by design.

schungx avatar Nov 04 '22 14:11 schungx