Re: Compiler "Phonics"

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
news:03-02-136@comp.compilers...


> + What's the best on-line source for getting an understanding of the concepts
> behind BNF?


Peter's page:
  www.cs.man.ac.uk/~pjj/bnf/bnf.html


There is some material on the softpanorama site:


  www.softpanorama.org/index.shtml


and of course, you can run through back-listings here at:


  compilers.iecc.com


==============================


> + 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"


web.archive.org/web/20020604023932/http://www.npl.uiuc.edu/~lnelson/bacchus-noir
.html


  www.devincook.com/goldparser/
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
www.cs.virginia.edu/~yel4j/cs655/ project/final_report.html


==========================
[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 comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.