[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Backus Naur
Re: Backus Naur
Fri, 8 Oct 2010 21:14:52 +0200 (CEST)
> Emacs has already some major modes for working with extended bnf, which
> is =
> standardized. This is not the case for my implementation, that I wrote
> for my own use.
> I don't understand what you mean -- could you explain the difference?
I do not know exactly to explain you the difference, as I do not know ebnf. I
made the major mode for my own use, in order to help me for the problems I want
to solve, with no intention for learning the extended bnf.
Vinicius Jose Latorre published "Links for ebnf2ps package" on his wiki page:
http://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/ViniciusJoseLatorre. He known the ebnf protocol.
I can say just I suppose the difference consist of regular expressions.
1. marks the terminals (defined by the regexp "all words inside apostrophe '' "
) using font-lock.
scans the file 1 second after the file was changed. It uses the regular
expression "all words starting at the beginning of line and finishing by ':'
newline " to collect left nonterminas. Afterwards, for every left nonterminal
X from the list, it adds properties to right nonterminal X, if it is not
terminal (terminals are marked in this moment with the properties defined by
the properties of font-lock).
Apart from this, I do not know what to tell you the diff is. I do not want to
spend time now on exptending the code to be ebnf compatible. But I suppose that
it is not much difference.
Découvrez les nouveaux modèles de voitures présentés au Mondial de
l’Automobile à Paris : http://actu.voila.fr/evenementiel/salon-auto-paris-2010/
- Backus Naur, A. Soare, 2010/10/02
- Re: Backus Naur,
A. Soare <=