Q1: CFG and BNF Relation
How Context-free Grammar (CFG) and BNF Notation are
related?
Context-Free Grammar (CFG) and Backus-Naur Form (BNF) notation are
closely related concepts used to define the syntax of formal languages,
particularly in the fields of computer science and linguistics. Here's how they are
connected:
1. Context-Free Grammar (CFG):
Definition: A CFG is a formal grammar that consists of rules (productions)
used to generate strings in a language. It is called "context-free" because
the production rules are applied regardless of the context of the non-
terminal symbols.
Components:
o Non-terminals (Variables): Symbols representing abstract
syntactic structures (e.g., <expression>).
o Terminals: The actual symbols of the language (e.g., +, *, id).
o Start Symbol: A special non-terminal symbol from which
production begins.
o Production Rules: Rules that describe how non-terminals can be
replaced by a combination of terminals and non-terminals.
Example of a CFG:
<expression> ::= <term> | <term> "+" <expression>
<term> ::= <factor> | <factor> "*" <term>
<factor> ::= "(" <expression> ")" | "id"
2. Backus-Naur Form (BNF):
Definition: BNF is a notation used to express CFGs in a concise and
formalized way. It was developed to describe the syntax of programming
languages and is essentially a syntactic representation of CFGs.
Syntax of BNF:
o <Non-terminal>: Denotes a non-terminal symbol.
o ::=: Separates the left-hand side (non-terminal) from its
productions.
o |: Indicates alternatives in production rules.
o Terminals are represented as they are, typically without any angle
brackets.
Example of BNF:
<expression> ::= <term> | <term> "+" <expression>
<term> ::= <factor> | <factor> "*" <term>
<factor> ::= "(" <expression> ")" | "id"
Relationship Between CFG and BNF:
1. BNF is a Notation for CFGs:
o BNF is used to write the rules of a CFG in a standard and human-
readable format.
o Every rule in a CFG can be expressed in BNF notation.
2. Expressiveness:
o Both CFG and BNF describe the same class of languages (context-
free languages) and are equally expressive.
3. Usage in Language Specification:
o CFG provides the theoretical foundation for defining languages.
o BNF is a practical way to represent CFGs, commonly used in
compiler design and language documentation.
Example:
Consider the grammar of a simple arithmetic expression:
CFG Representation:
S→E
E→E+T|T
T→T*F|F
F → (E) | id
BNF Representation:
<S> ::= <E>
<E> ::= <E> "+" <T> | <T>
<T> ::= <T> "*" <F> | <F>
<F> ::= "(" <E> ")" | "id"
Both represent the same language, with BNF providing a standardized and
compact format for specifying the grammar.
Extensions of BNF:
EBNF (Extended Backus-Naur Form): Introduces additional notations
(e.g., {}, [], () for repetition, optional elements, and grouping) to make the
grammar more concise.
BNF and CFGs are foundational tools in defining programming languages,
designing parsers, and understanding formal language theory.
Q2: Token Identificatin
With the following CFG, how can we identify the tokens that is
specified by regular expressions? Show the regular expression
please.
S→E
E→E+T|T
T→T*F|F
F → (E) | id
==
To identify the tokens specified by regular expressions in the given CFG, we
analyze the grammar and focus on the terminal symbols—the symbols that do
not appear on the left-hand side of any production rule. These terminals are the
building blocks of the language, and their structure can often be expressed using
regular expressions (regex).
Given CFG:
S→E
E→E+T|T
T→T*F|F
F → (E) | id
1. Identify Terminal Symbols:
Terminal symbols: +, *, (, ), and id
o These terminals are directly defined in the grammar rules as the
basic units of the language.
2. Write Regular Expressions for Each Token:
Each terminal represents a token that can be described using a regular
expression:
1. +: Represents the addition operator.
o Regex: \+
The backslash (\) is used to escape the + since it's a
metacharacter in regex.
2. *: Represents the multiplication operator.
o Regex: \*
The backslash (\) escapes the * metacharacter.
3. (: Represents an open parenthesis.
o Regex: \(
4. ): Represents a close parenthesis.
o Regex: \)
5. id: Represents an identifier, typically a variable name or an operand in
programming languages.
o Regex: [a-zA-Z_][a-zA-Z0-9_]*
Explanation:
[a-zA-Z_]: The first character of an identifier can be an
uppercase letter, lowercase letter, or underscore (_).
[a-zA-Z0-9_]*: Subsequent characters can include
letters, digits, or underscores.
3. Combined Token Regular Expressions:
To summarize, the tokens with their regex are:
Token Regex
Addition (+) \+
Multiplication (*) \*
Open parenthesis
\(
(()
Close parenthesis
\)
())
[a-zA-Z_][a-zA-Z0-
Identifier (id)
9_]*
4. Observations:
Operators (+, *) and parentheses ((, )) are directly mapped to single
characters and require simple regex patterns.
Identifiers (id) have more complex patterns to account for valid naming
rules.
Note:
These regular expressions are used during lexical analysis (tokenization) in a
compiler or interpreter to break down the input into tokens, which are then
processed according to the CFG for parsing.
Q3: How to specify tokens in BNF or EBNF?
How to specify tokens in BNF or EBNF? Is it necessarily to do so or BNF (or EBNF)
already sufficient to describe a programming language?
==
Specifying Tokens in BNF or EBNF
BNF and EBNF are used to define the syntax of a programming language,
including both high-level constructs (like expressions or statements) and the
tokens that form these constructs. However, the way tokens are specified and
whether it's necessary to do so depends on the level of abstraction and the
purpose of the grammar.
1. Specifying Tokens in BNF or EBNF
Tokens can be specified in BNF or EBNF using production rules that define their
structure. For instance:
BNF Example:
<identifier> ::= <letter> <identifier-tail>
<identifier-tail> ::= "" | <letter-or-digit> <identifier-tail>
<letter> ::= "a" | "b" | ... | "z" | "A" | "B" | ... | "Z" | "_"
<letter-or-digit> ::= <letter> | "0" | "1" | ... | "9"
This defines an identifier as starting with a letter or underscore, followed by
letters, digits, or underscores.
EBNF Example:
identifier = letter , { letter-or-digit } ;
letter = "a" | "b" | ... | "z" | "A" | "B" | ... | "Z" | "_" ;
letter-or-digit = letter | "0" | "1" | ... | "9" ;
EBNF uses concise constructs like { } for repetition, making it simpler to describe
tokens.
2. Is It Necessary to Specify Tokens?
In practice, tokens are usually specified separately using regular
expressions, and the grammar (in BNF or EBNF) assumes their existence.
Here's why:
1. Separation of Concerns:
o Lexical Analysis: Handles tokenization using regular expressions.
o Syntax Analysis: Uses BNF or EBNF to parse the token stream into
higher-level structures.
o By separating these concerns, the compiler design becomes
modular and easier to manage.
2. Simplicity and Readability:
o Describing low-level tokens like identifiers, numbers, and operators
in BNF can make the grammar verbose and harder to read.
o Regular expressions are more suited for specifying tokens, while
BNF/EBNF focuses on the overall structure of the language.
3. Ambiguity Avoidance:
o Regular expressions ensure unambiguous token definitions, while
BNF/EBNF may inadvertently introduce ambiguities when describing
tokens.
3. Can BNF or EBNF Fully Describe a Programming Language?
In theory, BNF or EBNF can describe a programming language entirely, including
its tokens. However, in practice:
1. BNF/EBNF Sufficiency:
o BNF/EBNF can describe both the syntax and tokens of a language,
but it becomes cumbersome for detailed lexical specifications like
floating-point numbers or complex identifiers.
2. Limitations:
o Regular Expressions: Some token patterns (e.g., recognizing
numbers or strings) are easier and more natural to specify with
regular expressions than BNF.
o Whitespace Management: BNF/EBNF struggles with handling
implicit tokens like whitespace or comments, which are crucial in
tokenization but are not part of the grammar.
3. Real-World Practice:
o Programming languages typically use regular expressions for
tokens (lexical rules) and BNF/EBNF for syntax rules. For
example:
Lexical rules in tools like Lex/Flex or ANTLR define tokens.
Syntax rules in tools like Yacc/Bison or ANTLR describe the
grammar.
4. Example: Combining Regular Expressions and EBNF
For a simple language:
Lexical Rules (Regular Expressions):
identifier = [a-zA-Z_][a-zA-Z0-9_]* ;
number = [0-9]+ ;
operator = "+" | "-" | "*" | "/" ;
Syntax Rules (EBNF):
expression = term , { ("+" | "-") , term } ;
term = factor , { ("*" | "/") , factor } ;
factor = "(" , expression , ")" | identifier | number ;
Conclusion
While BNF/EBNF is theoretically sufficient to describe a programming language, it
is more practical to use regular expressions for tokens and reserve BNF/EBNF
for higher-level grammar. This separation simplifies both the description and
implementation of the language.
