On 2016-01-30 12:26, Jürgen Hestermann wrote: > The look of the diagrams is very good.
Call me old-fashioned, but what is wrong with the EBNF (Extended Backus-Naur Form) which is also an ISO standard. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extended_Backus%E2%80%93Naur_Form I think the EBNF syntax is crystal clear to read and follow. Here is an extract from my "Object Pascal Grammar" addendum to the official FPC Language Reference documentation: =========================================================== Number -> [ "-" ], digit, { digit } ; String -> "'" , { all characters - "'" }, "'" ; alphabetic character -> "A" | "B" | "C" | "D" | "E" | "F" | "G" | "H" | "I" | "J" | "K" | "L" | "M" | "N" | "O" | "P" | "Q" | "R" | "S" | "T" | "U" | "V" | "W" | "X" | "Y" | "Z" ; digit -> "0" | "1" | "2" | "3" | "4" | "5" | "6" | "7" | "8" | "9" ; all characters -> ? all visible characters ? ; =========================================================== Regards, - Graeme - My public PGP key: http://tinyurl.com/graeme-pgp _______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal