Re: What's right with FORTH and wrong with c.l.f.

On Sat, 03 May 2008 09:56:47 +0400, Aleksej Saushev <asau@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:

>When it comes to more complex grammars, I start being afraid,
>that Forth BNF parsers are too unusable even for hardcore
>Forth hacker. The famous one-screener is purely conceptual ("toy"),
>I don't remember, if I have ever seen any example of its usage,
>as for others, I don't remember sample code for it either.
>To be successful in any field there should be documentation and
>sample code, or at least the very little sing of code usage.
>I don't observe any. I may be wrong here, since it's been quite
>a long time since I checked, but I'm not optimistic.

VFX Forth for Windows and Linux provide an extended version
of Brad Rodriguez code. Brad's code was well documented.

We have used it many times, and the Windows resource script
compiler is implemented using the BNF parser.

Stephen


-- 
Stephen Pelc, stephenXXX@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Engineering Ltd - More Real, Less Time
133 Hill Lane, Southampton SO15 5AF, England
tel: +44 (0)23 8063 1441, fax: +44 (0)23 8033 9691
web: http://www.mpeforth.com
- free VFX Forth downloads