[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: [relax-ng] Fw: [relax-ng-comment] Re: Attribute grammars
----- Original Message ----- From: "David Rosenborg" <david.rosenborg@pantor.com> To: <relax-ng-comment@lists.oasis-open.org> Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 5:25 PM Subject: [relax-ng-comment] Re: Attribute grammars James Clark wrote (on the relax-ng list): > My overall feeling is that this new notation is more rigorous and less > ad-hoc than my original notation. However, I think the main audience for > this Annex is implementors, who are primarily programmers not computer > scientists. We need to make sure the notation makes sense to a programmer > who I would guess would be more likely to be familiar with parser generators > (JavaCC, yacc etc) than with attribute grammars. If we can find a good way > to fix my comment 6, then I think we can have a notation that both makes > sense to our main audience and has a solid formal basis. Another worry I > have is that it is going to take significant effort to fix all the problems > in this new notation and make sure all the bugs have been squashed. A word from an implementor: Please stay with the current notation. It is compact and comprehensible. I've looked at the suggested attribute grammar notation, but it's no improvement from my perspective. Cheers, David
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC