From rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Mon Mar 22 14:50:47 2004 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 22 Mar 2004 14:50:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from rlpowell by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.30) id 1B5YFm-0004DR-CU for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 22 Mar 2004 14:50:42 -0800 Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 14:50:42 -0800 To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: Error in bnf.300 Message-ID: <20040322225042.GP30473@digitalkingdom.org> Mail-Followup-To: lojban-list@lojban.org References: <20040322034835.GJ4876@ccil.org> <20040322224659.80023.qmail@web41905.mail.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040322224659.80023.qmail@web41905.mail.yahoo.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i From: Robin Lee Powell X-archive-position: 7293 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list On Mon, Mar 22, 2004 at 02:46:59PM -0800, Jorge Llamb?as wrote: > --- John Cowan wrote: > > Rather than trying to discriminate, we just rejected this form > > altogether, which was made possible by treating i and ijek > > separately. > > Unfortunately that complicates the grammar and makes it more difficult > to learn. I'm probably not going to remember that you can't have a > prenex after ije/ibo/iseni'ibo/etc. I will, but only because of the amount of work I put in to debugging the problem. -Robin -- Me: http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ *** I'm a *male* Robin. "Constant neocortex override is the only thing that stops us all from running out and eating all the cookies." -- Eliezer Yudkowsky http://www.lojban.org/ *** .i cimo'o prali .ui