D grammar

[Jacob Carlborg via Digitalmars-d]

On 2016-06-14 11:31, Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> Thanks to Vladimir Panteleev, WebFreak001, ketmar, and Brian Schott for
> replying to my email about a grammar specification for D usable for
> IDEs and other tools.
>
> It seems that the D language is defined not by a re-purposable, machine
> readable grammar specification, but solely by the DMD compiler, the
> parse of which is not defined by a re-purposable, machine readable
> grammar. Thus any grammar specification that is created is unlikely to
> be correct and so all tooling and IDE support has to be based on
> incorrect data. Given the biggest problem with D is, according to the
> recent survey, tooling and IDE support, you get the feeling this is not
> an enviable position for a programming language to be in.

How many IDE's/editors do actually use something like EBNF? I know 
TextMate doesn't. It uses some kind of rules with extended regular 
expressions (simplified explanation).

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg