|Compiler "Phonics" email@example.com (Alex K. Angelopoulos) (2003-02-24)|
|Re: Compiler "Phonics" Trevor.Jenkins@suneidesis.com (2003-03-09)|
|Re: Compiler "Phonics" firstname.lastname@example.org (Joachim Durchholz) (2003-03-09)|
|Re: Compiler "Phonics" email@example.com (2003-03-09)|
|Re: Compiler "Phonics" firstname.lastname@example.org (Alex K. Angelopoulos) (2003-03-09)|
|From:||"Alex K. Angelopoulos" <email@example.com>|
|Date:||9 Mar 2003 17:30:14 -0500|
|Posted-Date:||09 Mar 2003 17:30:14 EST|
Summary of some things I have found, as well as a response by Peter Jinks -
who, ironically, maintains one of the most useful web references to me on
general lexing/parsing/and grammar issues.
"Alex K. Angelopoulos" <aka(at)mvps.org> wrote in message
> + What's the best on-line source for getting an understanding of the concepts
> behind BNF?
There is some material on the softpanorama site:
and of course, you can run through back-listings here at:
> + Finally - I keep seeing Naur's name mangled into "Noir". Did
> someone make this into an 'in' joke, or am I misreading overeager
> spellchecking? :)
Some amusing examples from Pete:
Google throws up some examples -
One (deleted) page admits to making a joke of "Bacchus Noir"
seems to be making a systematic mistake, but I can't imagine why.
[which is where I first saw this - aka]
The Preliminary agenda, Vienna, September 9-13, 1996
for ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 N2768 has both versions ("Backaus-Noir"!)
A student web page also makes this mistake
[the rest of this is by me, referencing iecc.com archive material - aka]
Actually, this is par for the course, since according to Naur BNF stands for
"Backus Normal Form":
cited in compilers.iecc.com/comparch/article/93-07-017
But that usage itself is apparently technically incorrect, since grammars are
typically not 'normal' in a mathematical sense (there is usually more than 1
possible form for a grammar). That may be the point outlined by Knuth in
advocating "Backus Naur Form" here:
Knuth, D.E. "Backus Normal Form vs. Backus Naur Form," Comm. ACM 7:12, 735-736.
cited in compilers.iecc.com/comparch/article/93-06-089
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.