There is also the grammar as it is laid out in TSPL3:

http://scheme.com/tspl3/grammar.html#./grammar:h0

Which is similar to what Mr. Robbin's wrote above, save for hoisting the
'+' & '-' rules into the complex production above.

On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 5:00 PM, John Cowan <[email protected]> wrote:

> Andrew Robbins scripsit:
>
> > On a more serious note, is there any harm in rewriting
> > the current syntax a little more clearly? For example:
>
> I like this proposal.  I have asked a friend of mine who knows how to
> use proof engines to see if this grammar is equivalent to the existing
> grammar.
>
> --
> John Cowan      [email protected]         http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
> Statistics don't help a great deal in making important decisions.
> Most people have more than the average number of feet, but I'm not about
> to start a company selling shoes in threes. --Ross Gardler
>
> _______________________________________________
> Scheme-reports mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports
>



-- 
====
Q. How many Prolog programmers does it take to change a lightbulb?
A. No.
_______________________________________________
Scheme-reports mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports

Reply via email to