BNF questions and comments

[BCS]

BLS wrote:
> Matti Niemenmaa schrieb:
> 
>> BLS wrote:
>>
>>> Yep. Porting Walter's language/grammar description into EBNF is a
>>> challenge. You may have recognized that I am working on Netbeans IDE
>>> support for D/MiniD... in order to establish code folding I have to
>>> create an NBS Schliemann file which is (mostly) similar to EBNF.
>>> Instead of {}  I have to use ()*, in fact a few minor things.
>>> Probabely we can exchange some information ?
>>
>>
>> A lot of people appear to be working on something which needs to parse D.
>>
>> It might be an idea to set up a page on Wiki4D called 
>> "CorrectCompleteDGrammar"
>> or something, writing a complete EBNF (or using Walter's syntax, which 
>> is also
>> fine) for D which is actually correct.
>>
> 
> I like this idea.
> 
> // Using this EBNF grammar  ???
> S = ModuleDeclaration {Statement} ";" .
> ModuleDeclaration = "module" identifier {"." identifier} ";" .
>  and so on ...
> 
> /* It will make live easier, when we have  a least our "Standard" EBNF 
> defination.
> */
> Bjoern
> 
> 

What might be fun would be to have one "standard" version in EBNF and 
then automagically derive others like pure BNF, right recursive, or 
whatever.