On 2019-11-19 11:37:04 +0000, Geoff Winkless wrote:
> Even if you do that you're still requiring the user to parse syntax
> according to esoteric rules.
Oh, please. Those "esoteric rules" have been in wide-spread use for
decades. If you look at any manual which tries to explain the syntax of
a programming language, markup language or something similar in a
(semi-)formal way, it probably uses something very similar. (More formal
texts often use BNF (or a variant), which are more expressive, but
harder to read. Personally I like syntax diagrams (sometimes called
railroad diagrams, but they seem to have mostly fallen out of fashion)
And of course, like almost any manual, the PostgreSQL manual explains
the notation in the preface:
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/notation.html
(Paper books are at an advantage here that readers usually actually
start at the beginning)
hp
--
_ | Peter J. Holzer | Story must make more sense than reality.
|_|_) | |
| | | hjp@hjp.at | -- Charles Stross, "Creative writing
__/ | http://www.hjp.at/ | challenge!"