[erlang-questions] Programmatic interface to the shell
Fred Hebert
mononcqc@REDACTED
Mon Aug 10 18:23:09 CEST 2015
On 08/10, Joe Armstrong wrote:
>Hello,
>
>Is there a *simple* programmatic interface to the Erlang shell?
>
>I'd like a module "shell_interface" that works like this:
>
> Pid = shell_interface:new_shell(),
>
>Returns a new process that behaves like the Erlang shell
>
> OutStr = shell_interface:eval(Pid, InStr)
>
Short answer is no. The Erlang shell in the `shell' module asks for
information via the IO protocol and pulls it in, rather than you pushing
it out.
There's ways to inject yourself in there, but it's not simple.
>This behaves like the Erlang shell. InStr should be what I typed into the
>shell. OutStr should be what the shell replied.
>
>For this purpose we can assume that InStr represents a complete
>sequence of expressions.
>
This sounds more like an evaluator/interpreter:
1> {ok, Tokens, _} = erl_scan:string("X + 4 * lists:sum([1,2,3,4]).").
...
2> {ok, [Form]} = erl_parse:parse_exprs(Tokens).
...
3> Bindings = erl_eval:add_binding('X', 17, erl_eval:new_bindings()).
[{'X',17}]
4> {value, Value, _} = erl_eval:expr(Form, Bindings).
{value,57,[{'X',17}]}
5> Value.
57
With these basic forms it becomes doable to write a mini-shell the way
you'd like it.
Eval = fun EvalLoop(Bindings) ->
receive
{cmd, Caller, Ref, String} ->
try
{ok, Tokens, _} = erl_scan:string(String),
%% many forms can be comma-separated
{ok, Forms} = erl_parse:parse_exprs(Tokens),
%% eval individually
{value, Val, NewBindings} = erl_eval:exprs(Forms, Bindings),
Caller ! {ok, Ref, Val},
EvalLoop(NewBindings)
catch
T:R ->
Caller ! {raise, Ref, T, R},
EvalLoop(Bindings)
end
end end.
Send = fun(Pid, String) ->
Ref = erlang:monitor(process, Pid),
Pid ! {cmd, self(), Ref, String},
receive
{ok, Ref, Value} -> Value;
{raise, Ref, T, R} -> erlang:T(R)
end end.
18> P = spawn(fun() -> Eval([]) end).
<0.62.0>
19> Send(P, "X=2+2.").
4
20> Send(P, "X*X.").
16
21> Send(P, "X/0.").
** exception error: an error occurred when evaluating an arithmetic expression
22> Send(P, "X.").
4
And there you have an evaluator. It doesn't support all the stuff like
'h().' and whatnot, but is close enough otherwise.
More information about the erlang-questions
mailing list