Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.lang.forth > #25030

Re: Scanning versus Parsing

Path csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!newsfeed.fsmpi.rwth-aachen.de!newsfeed.kamp.net!newsfeed.kamp.net!feeder1.cambriumusenet.nl!82.197.223.103.MISMATCH!feeder3.cambriumusenet.nl!feed.tweaknews.nl!212.6.121.138.MISMATCH!newsfeeder.ewetel.de!border3.nntp.ams.giganews.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!border1.nntp.ams.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local2.nntp.ams.giganews.com!nntp.bt.com!news.bt.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date Tue, 06 Aug 2013 08:31:43 -0500
User-Agent Microsoft-Entourage/12.27.0.100910
Date Tue, 06 Aug 2013 14:31:39 +0100
Subject Re: Scanning versus Parsing
From Ian van Breda <igvb@btopenworld.com>
Newsgroups comp.lang.forth
Message-ID <CE26B94B.3874%igvb@btopenworld.com> (permalink)
Thread-Topic Scanning versus Parsing
Thread-Index Ac6SqUettrldEZwjROiGrJF4/Fa2nA==
References <CE216AB0.36B5%igvb@btopenworld.com> <5200cfb4$0$612$e4fe514c@dreader34.news.xs4all.nl>
Mime-version 1.0
Content-type text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding 7bit
Lines 22
X-Usenet-Provider http://www.giganews.com
X-AuthenticatedUsername NoAuthUser
X-Trace sv3-j43JD/xXUZ4SNHLOmnvXE2sKp+v7gvj1Fdg1ruYVHEaw3r5D62h6oCzLvpedSGkMPs58JmJU3Sop2ON!eZ3KXIbnfHdsD8EonW6AsimtHmVr2ohaEXETOPMwVkTMlYz/CDadRcv+yIlpD95qbD+FsQ==
X-Complaints-To abuse@btinternet.com
X-DMCA-Complaints-To abuse@btinternet.com
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes 2165
Xref csiph.com comp.lang.forth:25030

Show key headers only | View raw


in article Albert van der Horst at wrote on 06/08/2013 11:28:

> In article <CE216AB0.36B5%igvb@btopenworld.com>,
> Ian van Breda  <igvb@btopenworld.com> wrote:
>> The terms 'parse' and 'parsing' are widely use in the documentation on
>> both in the original ANS Standard of 1994, [1], and in the draft
>> Proposal, [2].
>> 
>> However, the term 'parsing', in both the treatment of natural language
>> and the theory of computer languages, implies analysis of the structure
>> of a sentence or language construct. In computing it refers to checking
>> that the tokens extracted from the source code of a program follow the
>> grammatical rules of the language [3] and [4]. There are many examples
>> in the literature.
> 
> According to this definition there is no parsing in Forth.
> Blame us for using the term parsing for the nearest thing.
>> 
>> 
It would have been less confusing if the standards committee had used
scanning instead of parsing.

Back to comp.lang.forth | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Scanning versus Parsing Ian van Breda <igvb@btopenworld.com> - 2013-08-02 13:54 +0100
  Re: Scanning versus Parsing Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-08-02 09:14 -0500
    Re: Scanning versus Parsing Ian van Breda <igvb@btopenworld.com> - 2013-08-06 09:24 +0100
  Re: Scanning versus Parsing anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2013-08-02 15:25 +0000
  Re: Scanning versus Parsing albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-08-06 10:28 +0000
    Re: Scanning versus Parsing Ian van Breda <igvb@btopenworld.com> - 2013-08-06 14:31 +0100
      Re: Scanning versus Parsing albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-08-06 17:47 +0000
  Re: Scanning versus Parsing Hans Bezemer <the.beez.speaks@gmail.com> - 2013-08-11 19:20 +0200
    Re: Scanning versus Parsing Ian van Breda <igvb@btopenworld.com> - 2013-08-15 11:07 +0100

csiph-web