From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Sat Dec 27 17:27:35 2008 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Sat, 27 Dec 2008 17:27:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1LGkRL-00031p-Q1 for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Sat, 27 Dec 2008 17:27:35 -0800 Received: from mx.freeshell.org ([192.94.73.19] helo=sdf.lonestar.org ident=root) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1LGkRG-000317-QG for lojban-list@lojban.org; Sat, 27 Dec 2008 17:27:35 -0800 Received: from sdf.lonestar.org (IDENT:jwodder@faeroes.freeshell.org [192.94.73.9]) by sdf.lonestar.org (8.14.2/8.13.8) with ESMTP id mBS1RQYk013211 for ; Sun, 28 Dec 2008 01:27:26 GMT Received: (from jwodder@localhost) by sdf.lonestar.org (8.14.2/8.12.8/Submit) id mBS1RQRD021473 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Sun, 28 Dec 2008 01:27:26 GMT Date: Sun, 28 Dec 2008 01:27:25 +0000 From: Minimiscience To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: gleki xisri'i Message-ID: <20081228012723.GA3821@sdf.lonestar.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Organization: SDF Public Access UNIX System User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-Spam-Score: 2.2 X-Spam-Score-Int: 22 X-Spam-Bar: ++ X-archive-position: 15175 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: minimiscience@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list mulno .ui .o'u I've fixed my patch for the grammar; the problem was simply that discursive {bridi} (and presumably other free modifiers) weren't binding as tightly as they should have. The output from the patched parser now matches that of the original parser, and the final patch can be found at . Hopefully, the grammar now works exactly as it's supposed to. As to the question of what the difference between using `error' and using `%prec' is, I'm not entirely sure what you want me to say. `%prec' uses features as they were intended and is better (and less obfuscated) style? Specifying how to resolve shift/reduce conflicts is more understandable & portable than error recovery? Using `error' here is like passing void pointers to structures that start with a type-identifying integer in an effort to implement polymorphism when you could just code in C++? It "just works"? Both ways get the job done, but using %prec is the way that it's supposed to get done. mu'omi'e la'o gy. Minimiscience .gy. -- do ganai ka'e tcidu dei gi djuno lo dukse To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.