On Fri, May 24, 2002 at 09:57:53AM -0400, Ray Denenberg wrote:
> If you want to quicky write a bnf ...
I don't know if its a help or hinderance, but I updated my personal
CQL proposal I posted previously at
I removed some of the really contraversial things, but put some others
in. The grammar is unashamedly very close to what our current CCL
parser implements. In fact, I will put up our current CCL parser
grammar up here:
Its more as a debating point than anything - might be useful as a
source of seletive copy and paste too! :-)
Of course, I probably would not complain if CQL because our current
CCL grammar verbatim. Less code for me to write! :-) But somehow I
don't think that is likely to occur.... :-) :-) :-)
Alan Kent (mailto:[log in to unmask], http://www.mds.rmit.edu.au/~ajk/)
Project: TeraText Technical Director, InQuirion Pty Ltd (www.inquirion.com)
Postal: Multimedia Database Systems, RMIT, GPO Box 2476V, Melbourne 3001.
Where: RMIT MDS, Bld 91, Level 3, 110 Victoria St, Carlton 3053, VIC Australia.
Phone: +61 3 9925 4114 Reception: +61 3 9925 4099 Fax: +61 3 9925 4098