From phma@webjockey.net Sun Jan 26 08:31:01 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: phma@ixazon.dynip.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_0); 26 Jan 2003 16:31:01 -0000 Received: (qmail 19298 invoked from network); 26 Jan 2003 16:31:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m15.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 26 Jan 2003 16:31:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO blackcat.ixazon.lan) (208.150.110.21) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 26 Jan 2003 16:31:00 -0000 Received: by blackcat.ixazon.lan (Postfix, from userid 1001) id A003AA81C; Sun, 26 Jan 2003 16:30:59 +0000 (UTC) Organization: dis To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: valfendi algorithm Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 11:30:59 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.5 References: <5.2.0.9.0.20030124202537.03d9ab60@pop.east.cox.net> <5.2.0.9.0.20030126015227.03262740@pop.east.cox.net> In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20030126015227.03262740@pop.east.cox.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200301261130.59398.phma@webjockey.net> From: Pierre Abbat X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=92712300 X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 18383 Would it be better to put the check for these invalid cmene forms in the validation algorithm, which is the next part I'll write, rather than the word-breaking algorithm? The effect would be that e.g. /mibEnjilebrablOlailalaus/ would be lexed as {mi benji le brablolai la laus} and then the validator would call {laus} invalid; currently it lexes it as {mi benji le brablolai la la us} and the lexer calls {us} invalid. phma