From lojban-out@lojban.org Fri Apr 09 11:58:23 2004 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 78001 invoked from network); 9 Apr 2004 18:58:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.172) by m5.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 9 Apr 2004 18:58:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO chain.digitalkingdom.org) (64.81.49.134) by mta4.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 9 Apr 2004 18:58:22 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.30) id 1BC1Cm-0000hd-Qe for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Fri, 09 Apr 2004 11:58:20 -0700 Received: from dsl081-049-134.sfo1.dsl.speakeasy.net ([64.81.49.134] helo=chain.digitalkingdom.org) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1BC1C5-0000hA-7t; Fri, 09 Apr 2004 11:57:37 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Fri, 09 Apr 2004 11:57:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rlpowell by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.30) id 1BC1Bv-0000gx-G8 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Fri, 09 Apr 2004 11:57:27 -0700 Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2004 11:57:27 -0700 Message-ID: <20040409185727.GN14789@digitalkingdom.org> Mail-Followup-To: lojban-list@lojban.org References: <20040409051024.GA2886@skunk.reutershealth.com> <20040409174846.62499.qmail@web41902.mail.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040409174846.62499.qmail@web41902.mail.yahoo.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i X-archive-position: 7514 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 X-list: lojban-list To: lojban@yahoogroups.com X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 64.81.49.134 X-eGroups-From: Robin Lee Powell From: Robin Lee Powell Reply-To: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Subject: [lojban] Re: Official parser and "lo ni'a zu crino" X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790 X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 21988 On Fri, Apr 09, 2004 at 10:48:46AM -0700, Jorge Llamb?as wrote: > > --- jcowan@reutershealth.com wrote: > > > > I will not support, however, any structural changes that *could* be > > made as a result of going to infinite-lookahead grammar: no A/JA > > merger, e.g. For one thing, human beings don't support infinite > > lookahead. But I am okay with accepting things like "le broda joi > > le brodi", since that is not truly an ambiguity but just the result > > of smarter resolution of elidable terminators than Yacc allows. > > Isn't that self-contradictory? Why is infinite-lookahead acceptable > for JOI but not for JE? Because JA/A is formalized in the grammar; elidable terminators are not. -Robin -- http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ *** I'm a *male* Robin. "Many philosophical problems are caused by such things as the simple inability to shut up." -- David Stove, liberally paraphrased. http://www.lojban.org/ *** loi pimlu na srana .i ti rocki morsi