John B. Chambers (jbc%mccdb-dillo@mcc.ARPA)
Thu, 17 Apr 86 14:06:23 cst
A fix has been posted on unix-wizards for the current htable
"problem," but ...
The grammar in rfc952 defines
<domainname> ::= <hname>
<hname> ::= <<name>*["."<name>]
<name> ::= <let>[*[<let-or-digit-or-hyphen>]<let-or-digit>]
What, pray tell, is a <let> ? It certainly doesn't appear later in the grammar.
It's evidently not the same as a <print-char>, used in the definition of
commentary text. Could it be that I'm supposed to go back and read the
"Assumption" that says a "'name' ... is a text string ... drawn from the
alphabet (A-Z), digits (0-9), minus sign (-), and period (.) ...?" Shall
I then infer (A-Z) implies (a-z)? Ok, how about the definition for cputype:
<cputype> ::= PDP-11/70 | DEC-1080 | C/30 | CDC6400...etc.
Sorry, but my parser doesn't understand "...etc." Likewise for opsys:
<opsys> ::= ITS | MULTICS | TOPS20 | UNIX...etc.
I haven't seen anything here starting with a digit yet. Do I assume that
3B5 is thus invalid, or that anything goes?
I've personally seen four lexical variations for htable this week.
That shouldn't really have to happen.
Tell you what. If <somebody> agrees on a complete grammar, I'll just
bet that <somebody-else> would be happy to implement it. :-)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu Mar 09 2000 - 14:36:06 GMT