[This message was posted by David Rosenborg of Pantor Engineering AB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> to the "FAST Protocol" discussion forum at http://fixprotocol.org/discuss/46. You can reply to it on-line at http://fixprotocol.org/discuss/read/43e0d217 - PLEASE DO NOT REPLY BY MAIL.]
They're defined in the document but are treated as terminal symbols in the grammar. The definition of the terminal symbols that you find in the delta production: delta ::= IntegerDelta | ScaledNumberDelta | ASCIIStringDelta | ByteVectorDelta are in section 10.7 of the specification. So I think the informality would be then that it is not explicitly stated that terminal symbols are defined elsewhere in the document and that they appear with whitspace in the section headings. /David > no, there's no formal grammar definition for deltas. > > We didn't get around to including a complete grammar spec when we > compiled the FAST 1.1 specification. There was a lot of discussion on > how we should specify the grammar and we decided in the end to go with > the rather informal language used in the spec. If you have time and > interest you can always contribute a grammar spec. I'm sure it will be > greatly appreciated by the community. > > /Rolf > > > Thanks Rolf, > > > > I guess there is no formal grammar definition for delta's then? I'm > > with Object Computing: http://www.ociweb.com > > > > jeff [You can unsubscribe from this discussion group by sending a message to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Financial Information eXchange" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/FIX-Protocol?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
