Movatterモバイル変換


[0]ホーム

URL:


[RFC Home] [TEXT|PDF|HTML] [Tracker] [IPR] [Info page]

UNKNOWN
Network Working Group                                        R. AndersonRequest for Comments: 83                                      A. HarslemNIC: 5621                                                     J. Heafner                                                                    RAND                                                        18 December 1970LANGUAGE-MACHINE FOR DATA RECONFIGURATIONIntroduction   In NWG/RFC #80 we mentioned the needs for data reconfiguration along   with a complier/executor version of a Form Machine to perform those   manipulations.   This note proposes a different approach to the Form Machine.   Specifically, we describe a syntax-driven interpreter that operates   on a grammar which is an ordered set of replacement rules.  Following   the interpreter description are some "real-world" examples of   required data reconfigurations that must occur between RAND consoles   and the Remote Job System on the UCLA 360/91.  Lastly, we suggest   that the Protocol Manager mentioned in NWG/RFC #80 can be simplified   by using the Form Machine and two system forms (specified a priori in   the code).   Caveat:  The Form Machine is not intended to be a general purpose   programming language.  Note the absence of declaration statements,   etc.THE FORM MACHINEI.  Forms   A form is an ordered set of rules.      F = {R1, ...,Rn}   The first rule (R1) is the rule of highest priority; the last rule   (Rn) is the rule of lowest priority.   The form machine gets as input: 1) a list of addresses and lengths   that delimit the input stream(s); 2) a list of addresses and lengths   that delimit the output area(s); 3) a pointer to a list of form(s);   4) a pointer to the starting position of the input stream; and 5) a   pointer to the starting position of the output area.  The Form   Machine applies a form to the input string emitting an output string   in the output area.  The form is applied in the following manner:Anderson, et. al.                                               [Page 1]

RFC 83                 Language Machine For Data        18 December 1970      Step 1:  R1 is made the current rule.      Step 2:  The current rule is applied to the input data.      Step3:   a) If the rule fails, the rule of priority one lower is                  made current.               b) If the rule succeeds, the rule of highest priority is                  made current               c) When the rule of lowest priority fails, the form fails                  and application of the form to the input data                  terminates.      Step 4:  Continue at Step 2.   In addition, during Step 2, if the remainder of the input string is   insufficient to satisfy a rule, then that rule fails and partial   results are not emitted.  If a rule fills the output string,   application of the form is terminated.II.  Rules   A rule is a replacement operation of the form:      left-hand-side -> right-hand-side   Both sides of a rule consists of a series of zero or more _terms_   (see below) separated by commas.   The left-hand-side of the rule is applied to the input string at the   current position as a pattern-match operation.  If it exactly   describes the input, 1) the current input position pointer is   advanced over the matched input, 2) the right-hand-side emits data at   the current position in the output string, and 3) the current output   position pointer is advanced over the emitted data.III.  Terms   A term is a variable that describes the input string to be matched or   the output string to be emitted.  A term has three formats.Anderson, et. al.                                               [Page 2]

RFC 83                 Language Machine For Data        18 December 1970Term Format 1+---------------------------------------------------------------------+|                                                                     ||     name ( data  replication  .   value     :    length    )        ||            type   expression    expression      expression          ||                                                                     ||_____________________________________________________________________|   Any of the fields may be absent.   The _name_ is a symbolic name of the term in the usual programming   language sense.  It is a single, lower-case alphabetic that is unique   within a rule.   The _data type_ describes the kind of data that the term represents.   It is a member of the set:         {D, O, X, A, E, B}      Data types have the following meanings and implied unit lengths:      Char.       Meaning               Length      -----       --------              -------       D          decimal number        1 bit       O          octal number          3 bits       X          hexadecimal number    4 bits       A          ASCII character       8 bits       E          EBCDIC character      8 bits       B          binary number         1 bit   The _replication expression_ is a multiplier of the value expression.   A replication expression has the formats.      1)  an arithmetic expression of the members of the set:          {v(name), L(name) , numerals, programming variables}      The v(name) is a value operator that generates a numeric value of      the named data type and L(name) is a length operator that      generates a numeric value of the named string length.      The programming variable is described under term format three.      Arithmetic operators are shown below and have their usual      meanings.         {*, /, +, -}Anderson, et. al.                                               [Page 3]

RFC 83                 Language Machine For Data        18 December 1970   or 2) the terminal '#' which means an arbitrary multiple of the value           expression.   The _value expression_ is the unit value of a term expressed in the   format indicated by the data type.  The value expression is repeated   according to the replication expression.  A value expression has the   format:      1) same as part 1) of the replication expression where again         v(name) produces a numeric value   or 2) a single member of the set         {v(name), quoted literal}         where v(name) produces a data type (E or A) value).  (Note that         concatenation is accomplished through multiple terms.)   The _length expression_ is the length of the field containing the   value expression as modified by the replication expression.  It has   the same formats as a replication expression.   Thus, the term      x(E(7.'F'):L(x)) is named x, is of type EBCDIC, has the value      'FFFFFFF' and is of length 7.   The term      y(A:8) on the left-hand-side of a rule would be assigned the next      64 bits of input as its value; on the right-hand-side it would      only cause the output pointer to be advanced 64 bit positions      because is has no value expression (contents) to generate data in      the output area.Anderson, et. al.                                               [Page 4]

RFC 83                 Language Machine For Data        18 December 1970Term Format 2+---------------------------------------------------------------------+|                                                                     ||           name (label)                                              ||                                                                     |+---------------------------------------------------------------------+   The _label_ is a symbolic reference to a previously named term in the   rule.  It has the same value as the term by that name.   The identity operation below illustrates the use of the _label_   notation.      a(A:10) -> (a)   The (a) on the right-hand side causes the term a to be emitted in the   output area.  It is equivalent to the rule below.      a(A:10) -> (Av(a):L(a))Term Format 3+---------------------------------------------------------------------+|                                                                     ||   name    (  programming    connective        operand  )            ||              variable                       expression              ||                                                                     |+---------------------------------------------------------------------+   A _programming variable_ is a user-controlled data item that does not   explicitly appear in the input/output streams.  Its value can be   compared to input data, to constants, and used to generate output   data.  Programming variables are single, lower case Greek symbols.   They are used: to generate indices, counters, etc. in the output   area; to compare indices, counters, etc. in the input area, and; to   bind replacement rules where the data is context sensitive (explained   later).   A _connective_ is a member of the set:         {<-, =, !=, >=, <=, <, >}   The left arrow denotes replacement of the left part by the right   part; the other connectives are comparators.Anderson, et. al.                                               [Page 5]

RFC 83                 Language Machine For Data        18 December 1970   The _operand expression_ is an arithmetic expression of members of   the set:         {programming variables, v(name), l(name), numerals}   For example, if the programming variable [alpha] has the value 0 and   the rule      a(H[alpha]:1) -> (a), ([alpha]<-[alpha]+1), (H[alpha]:1)   is applied exhaustively to string of hexadecimal digits      0 1 2 3 4 5   the output would be the hexadecimal string      0 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 .   Note:  the above rule is equivalent to      a(B[alpha]:4) -> (a), ([alpha]<-[alpha]+1), (B[alpha]:4)IV.  Restrictions and Interpretations of Term Functions   When a rule succeeds output will be generated.  In the rule      a(A:#),(A'/':1)->(Ev(a):74),(E'?':1)   the input string is searched for an arbitrary number of ASCIIs   followed by a terminal '/'.  The ASCIIs (a) are converted to EBCDIC   in a 74-byte field followed by a terminal '?'.  This brings out three   issues:      1. Arbitrary length terms must be separated by literals since the         data is not type-specific.      2. The # may only be used on the left-hand-side of a rule.      3. A truncation padding scheme is needed.Anderson, et. al.                                               [Page 6]

RFC 83                 Language Machine For Data        18 December 1970      The truncation padding scheme is as follows:         a. Character to Character (types: A, E)            Output is left-justified with truncation or padding (with            blanks) on the right.         b. Character to Numeric (A, E to D, O, H, B)         c. Numeric to Character (D, O, H, B to A, E)         d. Numeric to Numeric (D, O, H, B)            Output is right-justified with padding or truncation on the            left.  Padding is zeros if output is numeric.EXAMPLES OF SOME DATA RECONFIGURATIONS   The following are examples of replacement rule types for specifically   needed applications.   Literal Insertion      To insert a literal, separate the left-hand-side terms for its      insertion on the right.         a(A:10),b(A:70)->(a),(E'LIT':3),(b)      The 80 ASCII characters are emitted in the output area with the      EBCDIC literal LIT inserted after the first 10 ASCII characters.   Deletion      Terms on the left are separated so that the right side may omit      unwanted terms.         (B:7),a(A:10)->(Ev(a):L(a))      Only the 10 ASCII characters are emitted (as EBCDIC) in the output      area, the 7 binary digits are discarded.   Spacing in the Output Buffer      Where a pre-formatted output buffer exists (typically a display      buffer) spacing can be realized by omitting the replication and      value functions from a term on the right.Anderson, et. al.                                               [Page 7]

RFC 83                 Language Machine For Data        18 December 1970         a(A:74)->(E:6),(Ev(a):74)      The (E:6) causes 48 bit positions to be skipped over in the output      area, then the 74 ASCII characters are converted to EBCDIC and      emitted at the current output position.   Arbitrary Lengths      Some devices/programs generate a variable number of characters per      line and it is desirable to produce fixed-length records from      them.         a(A:#) -> (Ev(a):74)      The ASCII characters are truncated or padded as required and      converted to EBCDIC in a 74 character field.   Transposition      Fields to be transposed should be isolated as terms on the left.         a(X:2),b(A:#)->(Ev(b):L(b)),(a)   String Length Computation      Some formats require the string length as part of the data stream.      This can be accomplished by the length function.         a(E:10),b(X'FF':2)->(BL(a)+L(b)+8:8),(Av(a):L(a)),(b)      The length term is emitted first, in a 8 bit field.  In this case      the length includes the length field as well as the ASCII      character field.   Expansion and Compression of repeated Symbols      The following rule packs repeated symbols.         a(E:1), b(E#*v(a):L(b)) -> (BL(b)+1:8),(a)      Given the input string below, three successive applications of the      rule will emit the output string shown.         Input: XXXXYYZZZZZZZ         Output: 4X2Y7ZAnderson, et. al.                                               [Page 8]

RFC 83                 Language Machine For Data        18 December 1970   APPLICATION OF THE FORM MACHINE TO PROGRAM PROTOCOLS   The Protocol Manager mentioned in NWG/RFC #80 needs several   interesting features that are properties of the above Form Machine.   In certain instances during a protocol dialog it might be acceptable   to get either an accept on connection A or an allocation on connect   B, that is, the order is sometimes unimportant.  The defined   procedure for applying rules allows for order independence.   A logger might send us a socket number embedded in a regular message   -- the socket number is intended to be the first of a contiguous set   of sockets that we can use to establish connections with some   program.  We wish to extract the socket number field from the regular   message, perhaps convert it to another format, and add to it to get   the additional socket names.  As a result of the regular message we   wish to emit several INIT system calls that include the socket   numbers that we have computed.  The value operator and the arithmetic   operators of the Form Machine can do this.   A third property of the Form Machine that is applicable to protocols   is inter- and intra-rule binding to resolve context sensitive   information.  In general we wish rules to be order independent but in   certain cases we wish to impose an ordering.  Using the logger in   NWG/RFC #66 as an example, the close that is sent by the logger can   have two different meanings depending upon its context.  If the close   is sent before the regular message containing the socket number then   it means call refused.  If the regular message precedes the close   then the call is accepted.  Since the close has contextual meaning,   we must bind it to the regular message to avoid introducing IF and   THEN into the Form Machine language.   Assume for a moment that we can express system calls in Form Machine   notation.  (The notation below is for _illustration only_ and is not   part of the Form Machine language.)  We have two ways to bind the   regular message to the close.  By intra-rule binding we insist that   the close be preceded by a regular message.      Reg. Msg , Close ->   Now assume for a moment that the remote party must have an echo after   each transmission.  Since we must emit an echo after receiving the   regular message and before the close is sent, then we must use   inter-rule binding.  This can be accomplished with the programming   variable.  It is assigned a value when the regular message is   received and the value is tested when the close is received.      Reg. Msg -> Echo , ([lambda]+1)Anderson, et. al.                                               [Page 9]

RFC 83                 Language Machine For Data        18 December 1970      Close, ([lambda]=1) ->   To illustrate inter-rule binding via the programming variable the   connection protocol in NWG/RFC #66 could be represented by passing   the following form to a protocol manager.  (The notation below is for   _illustration only_ and is not part of the Form Machine language).      1. ->INIT(parameters) , ([alpha]<-0)      Send an INIT(RTS).      2.  INIT(parameters) -> ALLOCATE(parameters)      Send an allocate in response to the connection completion (an STR      received).      3.  Reg. Msg (parameters) -> ([alpha]<-1)      When the messages bearing link numbers is received, set an      internal indicator.  (The extraction of the link is not      illustrated.)      4.  CLOSE(parameters),([alpha]=1) ->                             INIT(parameters),INIT(parameters)      When the close is received following the regular message [2] is      checked to see that the regular message was received before      establishing the duplex connection.  If the close is received with      no regular message preceding it (call refused) the form will fail      (since no rules is satisfied).   This protocol can be handled via a single form containing four   replacement rules.  We have examined similar representations for more   complex protocol sequences.  Such protocol sequences, stored by name,   are an asset to the user; he can request a predefined sequence to be   executed automatically.Anderson, et. al.                                              [Page 10]

RFC 83                 Language Machine For Data        18 December 1970Two System Forms to Handle Protocol Statements   Assume that we have a Protocol Manager that manages protocol   sequences between consoles and the Network.  The consoles generate   and accept EBCDIC character strings and the Network transmits binary   digits.  The console user has a language similar to system calls in   which he can create and store protocol sequences via Protocol   Manager, and at the same time he can indicate which commands are   expected to be sent and which are to be received.  Upon command the   Protocol Manager can execute this sequence with the Network,   generating commands and validating those received.  Assume also that   the Protocol Manager displays the dialog for the console user as it   progresses.   In order to translate between console and Network for generating,   comparing, and displaying commands, the Protocol Manager can use the   Form Machine.  Two system forms are needed, see Fig. 1.  One is a   console-to-Network set of rules containing EBCDIC to binary for all   legal commands; the other is a mirror image for Network-to-console.REQUEST   Since language design is not our forte, we would like comments from   those with more experience than we.Anderson, et. al.                                              [Page 11]

RFC 83                 Language Machine For Data        18 December 1970                           System form:                             C -> N                           +----------+                           | one rule |                           | for each |                           | legal    |                           | command  |                   +-------|- - - - - |<----+                   |       +----------+     |            Binary |                        | EBCDIC                   |                        |   +----------+    |                        |      +----------+   |          |<---+                        +------|          |   | Network  |                                    | Consoles |   |          |----+                        +----->|          |   +----------+    |                        |      +----------+                   | Binary          EBCDIC |                   |                        |                   |                        |                   |       System form:     |                   |          N -> C        |                   |       +----------+     |                   +------>|- - - - - |-----+                           | one rule |                           | for each |                           | legal    |                           | response |                           +----------+   Figure 1 -- Application of System Form for Protocol ManagementAnderson, et. al.                                              [Page 12]

RFC 83                 Language Machine For Data        18 December 1970Distribution List-----------------   Alfred Cocanower - MERIT   Gerry Cole - SDC   Les Earnest - Stanford   Bill English - SRI   James Forgie - Lincoln Laboratory   Jennings Computer Center - Case   Nico Haberman - Carnegie-Melon   Robert Kahn - BB&N   Peggy Karp - MITRE   Benita Kirstel - UCLA   Tom Lawrence - RADC/ISIM   James Madden - University of Illinois   George Mealy - Harvard   Thomas O'Sullivan - Raytheon   Larry Roberts - ARPA   Ron Stoughton - UCSB   Albert Vezza- MIT   Barry Wessler - Utah   [The original document included non-ASCII characters.  The Greek   letters Alpha and Lambda have been spelled out and enclosed in   square brackets "[ ]".  A curly "l" character   has been replaced by capital L.  Left and right arrows have been   replaced by "<-" and "->" respectively.  RFC-Editor]          [This RFC was put into machine readable form for entry]          [into the online RFC archives by Lorrie Shiota, 10/01]Anderson, et. al.                                              [Page 13]

[8]ページ先頭

©2009-2025 Movatter.jp