Article View: comp.lang.misc
Article #6344Re: Language Design
From: Ric Holt
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 1989 14:44
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 1989 14:44
23 lines
1492 bytes
1492 bytes
#>>A context-free grammar G is a 4-tuple G = <N,T,P,S> where N is a finite #>>set of nonterminal symbols, T (the alphabet) is a finite set of terminal #>>symbols, P is a finite set of production rules of the form A -> X1 X2 X3 ... #>>where A is in N, and X1, X2, X3 are in Union(N,T). S in N is the Start symbol. #>"Why are even bothering to argue with these idiots?" #>Good question. #> #>Bob Hearn #>hearn@claris.com In my modest opinion, Bob Hearn is doing a fine job of entertaining us with his emotional outbursts, but a considerable disservice with his claims. Likely, Cormack is correct and Hearn is wrong. Likely C's grammar is not Context Free. I believe Cormack (in his academic way) has proven Hearn wrong. I believe C's grammar has the appearance of a context free grammar but that it violates the mathematical def of context free. This question (is C's grammar context free) is important and we should get a clear answer to it rather than outbursts. Could someone please settle this definitely? Ric Holt
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<89Mar23.094504est.4328@turing.toronto.edu>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!turing.toronto.edu!holtReferences:
<5200040@m.cs.uiuc.edu> <12443@watdragon.waterloo.edu> <9122@claris.com> <12606@watdragon.waterloo.edu> <9162@claris.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!turing.toronto.edu!holt From: holt@turing.toronto.edu (Ric Holt) Subject: Re: Language Design Message-ID: <89Mar23.094504est.4328@turing.toronto.edu> Organization: /usr/local/lib/organization References: <5200040@m.cs.uiuc.edu> <12443@watdragon.waterloo.edu> <9122@claris.com> <12606@watdragon.waterloo.edu> <9162@claris.com> Date: Thu, 23 Mar 89 09:44:59 EST