vbdis@aol.com (VBDis)
20 Nov 2004 21:39:38 -0500

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
EBNF vbdis@aol.com (2004-11-20)
Re: EBNF nkavv@skiathos.physics.auth.gr (2004-11-28)
Re: EBNF martin@cs.uu.nl (Martin Bravenboer) (2004-11-28)
Re: EBNF vbdis@aol.com (2004-12-01)
Re: EBNF henry@spsystems.net (2004-12-11)
Re: EBNF vidar@hokstad.name (Vidar Hokstad) (2004-12-16)
Re: EBNF cfc@shell01.TheWorld.com (Chris F Clark) (2004-12-17)
| List of all articles for this month |

From: vbdis@aol.com (VBDis)
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 20 Nov 2004 21:39:38 -0500
Organization: AOL Bertelsmann Online GmbH & Co. KG http://www.germany.aol.com
Keywords: syntax, question
Posted-Date: 20 Nov 2004 21:39:38 EST

I've just read ISO/IEC 14977 and wonder how useful this standard
really is?

IMO these people missed to separate lexer from parser issues. With
such a distinction everything would have been simpler, shorter and
more precise to describe?

Furthermore I would like to hear opinions about the differences
between formal lexer and parser grammars. IMO it's not a good idea to
use the same meta language for both kinds of grammars, even if it were
possible to construct such a super language?

[It is my impression that this is intended to provide guidance to the
authors of standards documents and textbooks. I agree that it's not
suitable for feeding to a parser generator. -John]

Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.