From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,c89a4b067758a6e1
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2008 22:38:39 +0100
From: Manuel Collado <m.collado@lml.ls.fi.upm.es>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Is it really Ok to assert that the Ada syntax is a context-free
  grammar ?
References: 
 <4a448c5c-a4ed-446f-bb8b-67c5ba99927a@f47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com>
 	<FWLuj.41404$yE1.10867@attbi_s21> <47bbfb5b$1@news.post.ch>
 	<37b7e369-01c8-4adf-8d1e-c40fa7e51cea@f47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com>
 	<9012d70c-8d61-4e2e-9eda-c12d48f1d9e1@s19g2000prg.googlegroups.com>
 	<47bc40e7$0$21890$4f793bc4@news.tdc.fi>
 <cf265246-91c7-4d08-b9d0-05dd91d9ee82@34g2000hsz.googlegroups.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <cf265246-91c7-4d08-b9d0-05dd91d9ee82@34g2000hsz.googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: 138.100.242.202
Message-ID: <47bc9f09@news.upm.es>
X-Trace: news.upm.es 1203543817 138.100.242.202 (20 Feb 2008 22:43:37 +0100)
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news4.google.com!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!news.in2p3.fr!in2p3.fr!kanaga.switch.ch!switch.ch!news.rediris.es!news.upm.es!not-for-mail
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:19924
Date: 2008-02-20T22:38:39+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Hibou57 (Yannick Duch�ne) escribi�:
> ... I was just curious
> beceause I used to read that Ada and Pascal are exemples of unambigous
> grammar.

Weel, the fact is that the Pascal grammar *is ambiguous*. Have you ever 
heard the term "dangling else"?

-- 
Manuel Collado - http://lml.ls.fi.upm.es/~mcollado