Good article. This little line interests me: > For the last part a PEG, actually in this case an EBNF interpreter is needed. Not sure how I should parse this.

Good article. This little line interests me: > For the last part a PEG, actually in this case an EBNF interpreter is needed. Not sure how I should parse this. Should I read it as: For the last part, a PEG interpreter is needed. Actually an EBNF interpreter is needed. Because a PEG is just a spec, you can't substitute an interpreter for it