Semantics, opt in Semantics

Seima Rao <seimarao@gmail.com>
Thu, 15 Jan 2015 17:42:17 +0530

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
Semantics, opt in Semantics seimarao@gmail.com (Seima Rao) (2015-01-15)
Re: Semantics, opt in Semantics rpw3@rpw3.org (2015-01-16)
Re: Semantics, opt in Semantics kaz@kylheku.com (Kaz Kylheku) (2015-01-16)
Re: Semantics, opt in Semantics haberg-news@telia.com (Hans Aberg) (2015-01-16)
Re: Semantics, opt in Semantics wclodius@earthlink.net (2015-01-16)
Re: Semantics, opt in Semantics gah@ugcs.caltech.edu (glen herrmannsfeldt) (2015-01-17)
Re: Semantics, opt in Semantics monnier@iro.umontreal.ca (Stefan Monnier) (2015-01-18)
| List of all articles for this month |
From: Seima Rao <seimarao@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2015 17:42:17 +0530
Organization: Compilers Central
Keywords: semantics, question, comment
Posted-Date: 16 Jan 2015 10:18:44 EST

Hi,


        The Backus Naur Form is a great mathematical model. It explains syntax
        quite succintly.


        In that form, the opt qualifier which stands for optional or
        epsilon is utilized extensively for optional syntax.


        Is there something similar for semantics i.e. is there something optional
        in semantics.


        Also, what is the equivalent in semantics of BNF ?


Sincerely,
Seima Rao.
[Man, there's a can of worms. There's no semantic formalism that matches real
semantics as well as BNF matches real syntax. -John]

Post a followup to this message

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