Re: gnuplot-4.4.0-rc1 breaks gnuplot script

[Teo S B. <teo...@gm...>]

I gave an argument for allowing trailing definitions at bottom of
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.graphics.gnuplot.devel/9253


2010/2/14 Hans-Bernhard Bröker <HBB...@t-...>:
> Teo S Bernhard wrote:

<snipped>

>> - that it is gnuplot 4.4.0 rc1 that is at odds with the
>> documentation.
>
> I disagree with that claim.  It was the earlier versions that were at odds
> with the documentation, by allowing things that the documentation said they
> didn't.

I can agree that we have error if there is mismatch between program
behaviour and documentation.

It is, however, a matter of philosophy if it is the help text or the
implementation that is in error. In another reply I point to facts:
1) the BNF of the help text contradicts a certain help text example
showing leading definitions, and
2) the help text and the actual implementation (the code) is much more
liberal than the BNF-form in allowing definitions including trailing
ones

Here, I think the BNF is wrong. In the another reply I have suggested
a more correct BNF that is consistent with program behaviour and the
other help text.

Teo