Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 209.85.213.169 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of alanpost@sunflowerriver.org) client-ip=209.85.213.169;
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2012 13:38:57 -0601
From: ".alyn.post." <alyn.post@lodockikumazvati.org>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: Other Lojban PEG parsers?  (Alan)
Message-ID: <20120604193921.GL9665@sunflowerriver.org>
Mail-Followup-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
References: <20120601191346.GM8656@stodi.digitalkingdom.org>
 <d5f40956-a2b8-4c35-b288-201f1ac669c4@googlegroups.com>
 <20120604054542.GS8656@stodi.digitalkingdom.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20120604054542.GS8656@stodi.digitalkingdom.org>
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-2
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam_score: 1.4
X-Spam_score_int: 14
X-Spam_bar: +
X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "stodi.digitalkingdom.org", has
 identified this incoming email as possible spam.  The original message
 has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label
 similar future email.  If you have any questions, see
 the administrator of that system for details.
 
 Content preview:  Marek and I debugged this some time ago, and as best as I
   could determine, the PEG parser Marek was using was broken and did not properly
    parse the PEG grammar. The grammar itself did not appear to be a problem.
    [...] 
 
 Content analysis details:   (1.4 points, 5.0 required)
 
  pts rule name              description
 ---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
  1.4 BUG6152_INVALID_DATE_TZ_ABSURD BUG6152_INVALID_DATE_TZ_ABSURD
  0.6 INVALID_DATE_TZ_ABSURD Invalid Date: header (timezone does not exist)
 -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW      RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, low
                             trust
                             [209.85.212.61 listed in list.dnswl.org]
 -0.0 SPF_PASS               SPF: sender matches SPF record
  0.1 DKIM_SIGNED            Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid
 -0.1 DKIM_VALID             Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature

Marek and I debugged this some time ago, and as best as I could
determine, the PEG parser Marek was using was broken and did not
properly parse the PEG grammar.  The grammar itself did not appear
to be a problem.

That situation could have changed, but it would be news to me.

-Alan

On Sun, Jun 03, 2012 at 10:45:42PM -0700, Robin Lee Powell wrote:
> I don't understand; is what you've attached a working parser using
> the PEG grammar or not?
>=20
> If there are PEG rules that appear not to work, please post them to
> the BPFK list with details.
>=20
> -Robin
>=20
> On Sun, Jun 03, 2012 at 02:29:06PM -0700, Marek Rogalski wrote:
> > When I've been trying to run it in custom parser, some rules caused loo=
ping=20
> > (or some other issues I don't remember).
> >=20
> > I've attached archive with combined grammar & sources (with some minor=
=20
> > changes that can be diffed from originals) that once worked outside of=
=20
> > camxes.
> >=20
> > W dniu pi=B1tek, 1 czerwca 2012 21:13:47 UTC+2 u=BFytkownik Robin Powel=
l=20
> > napisa=B3:
> > >
> > >
> > > Besides camxes, what have people gotten the Lojban PEG running in?=20
> > >
> > > IIRC Alan was doing a Haskell version?=20
> > >
> > > -Robin=20
> > >
> > > --=20
> > > http://singinst.org/ :  Our last, best hope for a fantastic future.=
=20
> > > .i ko na cpedu lo nu stidi vau loi jbopre .i danfu lu na go'i li'u .e=
=20
> > > lu go'i li'u .i ji'a go'i lu na'e go'i li'u .e lu go'i na'i li'u .e=
=20
> > > lu no'e go'i li'u .e lu to'e go'i li'u .e lu lo mamta be do cu sofyba=
kni=20
> > > li'u=20
> > >
> > >
> >=20
> > --=20
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Grou=
ps "lojban" group.
> > To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ms=
g/lojban/-/3txmRZ7CTiMJ.
> > To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@google=
groups.com.
> > For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lo=
jban?hl=3Den.
> >=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
> --=20
> http://singinst.org/ :  Our last, best hope for a fantastic future.
> .i ko na cpedu lo nu stidi vau loi jbopre .i danfu lu na go'i li'u .e
> lu go'i li'u .i ji'a go'i lu na'e go'i li'u .e lu go'i na'i li'u .e
> lu no'e go'i li'u .e lu to'e go'i li'u .e lu lo mamta be do cu sofybakni =
li'u
>=20
> --=20
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups=
 "lojban" group.
> To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegr=
oups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojb=
an?hl=3Den.
>=20

--=20
.i ma'a lo bradi cu penmi gi'e du

--=20
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegrou=
ps.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban=
?hl=3Den.