Re: Formatting of Language LRMs

"lpsantil@gmail.com" <lpsantil@gmail.com>
Fri, 20 Jun 2014 10:10:26 -0700 (PDT)

From comp.compilers

Related articles
Formatting of Language LRMs seimarao@gmail.com (Seima Rao) (2014-06-17)
*Re: Formatting of Language LRMs lpsantil@gmail.com (lpsantil@gmail.com)* (2014-06-20)**
Re: Formatting of Language LRMs ivan@ootbcomp.com (Ivan Godard) (2014-06-20)
Re: Formatting of Language LRMs gah@ugcs.caltech.edu (glen herrmannsfeldt) (2014-06-21)
Re: Formatting of Language LRMs kaz@kylheku.com (Kaz Kylheku) (2014-06-21)
Re: Formatting of Language LRMs Pidgeot18@verizon.net.invalid (=?UTF-8?B?Sm9zaHVhIENyYW5tZXIg8J+Qpw==?=) (2014-06-22)
Re: Formatting of Language LRMs mertesthomas@gmail.com (2014-06-30)
Re: Formatting of Language LRMs ivan@ootbcomp.com (Ivan Godard) (2014-07-03)
[3 later articles]

From:	"lpsantil@gmail.com" <lpsantil@gmail.com>
Newsgroups:	comp.compilers
Date:	Fri, 20 Jun 2014 10:10:26 -0700 (PDT)
Organization:	Compilers Central
References:	14-06-010
Keywords:	standards
Posted-Date:	20 Jun 2014 21:16:09 EDT

Personally, I enjoy Wirth Syntax Notation (WSN)[1] more than BNF/EBNF.
There are wikipedia entries, I believe, also incorrectly identifies
the PL/0 language grammar (also Wirth's work)[2][3] as EBNF when it is
WSN.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wirth_syntax_notation
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recursive_descent_parser
[3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PL/0