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=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Received: by 10.157.17.117 with SMTP id p50mr2860008otp.4.1488033979598;
        Sat, 25 Feb 2017 06:46:19 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 10.157.12.1 with SMTP id 1mr573911otr.2.1488033979564; Sat, 25
 Feb 2017 06:46:19 -0800 (PST)
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.glorb.com!e137no1134801itc.0!news-out.google.com!15ni667itm.0!nntp.google.com!e137no1134790itc.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2017 06:46:19 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <o8rpq4$1j1$1@gioia.aioe.org>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com;
 posting-host=47.70.191.121;
 posting-account=XYi0owoAAAC_eOHXu2MQKhBYUNiEUxE2
NNTP-Posting-Host: 47.70.191.121
References: <a319aa93-f896-48ae-9b87-489b623ab75f@googlegroups.com>
 <5881b0ca-3a11-442e-88ce-18d0a6142c24@googlegroups.com>
 <o8rpq4$1j1$1@gioia.aioe.org>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <a59a90d4-4164-479d-a656-8f265caa2ebb@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: State of the compiler market
From: "Ingo M." <announce@amkade.com>
Injection-Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2017 14:46:19 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:33407
Date: 2017-02-25T06:46:19-08:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Dmitry A. Kazakov:

> 1. Of course Ada Reference Manual has BNF, it had it since the day one.

It was (and possibly still is, I'll check it) incomplete, or a variant of B=
NF with unspecified elements. For details read http://compgroups.net/comp.l=
ang.ada/ada-2012-bnf-syntax-summary-incomplete/1413223

> 2. It is easier to design parser without any generators, so no BNF is=20
> even needed. Especially when the rules are too cluttered so that they=20
> rather hide the syntax than explain it.

Generators for BNF are usual but I don't like generators. I favor Wirth's P=
ascal style which is illustrated in his compiler manual. It requires a lot =
more code to write. However, such code is way easier to maintain (IMHO) tha=
n cluttered generator code, in particular if new features are to be added.

> 3. Ada parser is the least problem, so minor that there is nothing to=20
> talk about. It is a matter of a pair days to work out.

Maybe, but an incomplete BNF is useless anway.