[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Backus Naur

From: A. Soare
Subject: Re: Backus Naur
Date: 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 
> only=
>      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.

My code:

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/

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]