From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "A. Soare" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Backus Naur Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2010 21:14:52 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <29477536.423381286565292991.JavaMail.www@wwinf4617> Reply-To: alinsoar@voila.fr NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1286571248 28452 80.91.229.12 (8 Oct 2010 20:54:08 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2010 20:54:08 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Oct 08 22:54:07 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1P4Jx6-0004wb-W0 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 08 Oct 2010 22:54:05 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38498 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1P4Jia-0007F1-2u for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 08 Oct 2010 16:39:04 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=44791 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1P4JR9-0005Sx-UF for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Oct 2010 16:21:07 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1P4IPA-0004jm-4P for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Oct 2010 15:14:57 -0400 Original-Received: from smtp3.voila.fr ([193.252.22.173]:64266 helo=smtp1.voila.fr) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1P4IP9-0004jJ-Tm; Fri, 08 Oct 2010 15:14:56 -0400 Original-Received: from me-wanadoo.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mwinf4907.voila.fr (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 1A725700008D; Fri, 8 Oct 2010 21:14:53 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from me-wanadoo.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mwinf4907.voila.fr (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 0E2F37000093; Fri, 8 Oct 2010 21:14:53 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from wwinf4617 (wwinf4617 [10.232.13.61]) by mwinf4907.voila.fr (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 000F7700008D; Fri, 8 Oct 2010 21:14:52 +0200 (CEST) X-ME-UUID: 20101008191453340.000F7700008D@mwinf4907.voila.fr X-Originating-IP: [92.81.118.66] X-Wum-Nature: EMAIL-NATURE X-WUM-FROM: |~| X-WUM-TO: |~| X-WUM-CC: |~| X-WUM-REPLYTO: |~| X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:131510 Archived-At: > Emacs has already some major modes for working with extended bnf, whi= ch is =3D > standardized. This is not the case for my implementation, that I wrot= e only=3D > for my own use. >=20 > 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 pag= e:=20 http://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/ViniciusJoseLatorre. He known the ebnf proto= col. 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 ex= pression "all words starting at the beginning of line and finishing by ':' = newline " to collect left nonterminas. Afterwards, for every left nontermi= nal X from the list, it adds properties to right nonterminal X, if it is no= t 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 suppo= se that it is not much difference. Alin. ____________________________________________________ D=C3=A9couvrez les nouveaux mod=C3=A8les de voitures pr=C3=A9sent=C3=A9s = au Mondial de l=E2=80=99Automobile =C3=A0 Paris : http://actu.voila.fr/even= ementiel/salon-auto-paris-2010/