From lojban+bncCOjSjrXVGBCstuLlBBoEPexLyg@googlegroups.com Fri Oct 15 11:19:42 2010 Received: from mail-gx0-f189.google.com ([209.85.161.189]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1P6osT-00006h-6M; Fri, 15 Oct 2010 11:19:41 -0700 Received: by gxk6 with SMTP id 6sf1182458gxk.16 for ; Fri, 15 Oct 2010 11:19:30 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:x-beenthere:received:received:received :received:received-spf:received:mime-version:received:received :in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=OydDp3DyvYUXRev8gR4w6cjiuop9jCAwd3aRfTB/1jg=; b=HrqWBgVFi0YU2Rjw743cm5X7+tPD9CIiLGTLZa5QbZfu+E2xJIVU77SGYeXad/KCjg w2vllRA6FH9Gxo4a6CxdooxC0fvbtJwgkiu0/hOzhUIPg9mapbZn9qlaVO2r2ajSfvo7 s8xrXrpS5c5VvTp1D/0xhZd2FOk4ThB8iUgDM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type; b=arNPwthhTFD9Ej2DsWOi0DrgfJZ5Crs4KwqSf9gvNzjeAcWPhCBEcipXQ201mXWkhQ uNek9nANwTynbvmyil041TFy7LkK6aHRYFfkz1SQemi4gmxQOdCZwAGIksOSUKHgUY1F wXOCE9txV5fXKvTgpoevqVXy5PRgdNZf9TCIg= Received: by 10.151.135.21 with SMTP id m21mr21412ybn.44.1287166764201; Fri, 15 Oct 2010 11:19:24 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.231.180.73 with SMTP id bt9ls2588670ibb.0.p; Fri, 15 Oct 2010 11:19:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.183.11 with SMTP id ce11mr452720ibb.5.1287166763284; Fri, 15 Oct 2010 11:19:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.183.11 with SMTP id ce11mr452719ibb.5.1287166763223; Fri, 15 Oct 2010 11:19:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-iw0-f169.google.com (mail-iw0-f169.google.com [209.85.214.169]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id j25si3531721ibb.4.2010.10.15.11.19.22; Fri, 15 Oct 2010 11:19:22 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of lukeabergen@gmail.com designates 209.85.214.169 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.214.169; Received: by mail-iw0-f169.google.com with SMTP id 1so1616463iwn.14 for ; Fri, 15 Oct 2010 11:19:22 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.231.31.135 with SMTP id y7mr1022322ibc.38.1287166429895; Fri, 15 Oct 2010 11:13:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.48.79 with HTTP; Fri, 15 Oct 2010 11:13:49 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <385d6b2f-c484-494b-9241-6d7429ce0ec3@p20g2000prf.googlegroups.com> Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2010 14:13:49 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Questions on isolating utterances before completely parsing From: Luke Bergen To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: lukeabergen@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of lukeabergen@gmail.com designates 209.85.214.169 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=lukeabergen@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.com Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0022152d5fb5d228940492abc996 --0022152d5fb5d228940492abc996 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > .i mi lu mi prami do cusku > Is completely grammatical text, and parses exactly as though a {li'u} had been included between {do} and {cusku}. That's bizarre. I didn't realize that {lu} was that permissive. I just assumed that it would suck up everything up till you hit {li'u} and if doing so hit something ungrammatical (like {mi prami do cusku}) then *it* would be ungrammatical and you just should have used {lo'u}. Well that's one that I'll have to keep in mind in the future. On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 12:40 PM, Adam Lopresto wrote: > >> * Is it true that the fact that LIhU, TOI, and TUhE are elidable makes > >> isolating an utterance impossible without completely parsing the text > >> the utterance is in? (Just making sure.) > > > > I'm not entirely sure what enables those to be elided, but I believe that > > such cases are rare, like only-at-the-end-of-text rare. Also, there are > > various people, me, .xorxes., possibly others I don't know, who feel that > > they should /never/ be elidable anyway. > > Those are elidable for exactly the reason that every other terminator > in the language is elidable, and in exactly the same way. The only > usual thing is that those can include {.i} inside them, while most > others cannot. (LEhU and ZOI are the other considerations; not also ZO > and the rest of the Magic Words). > > .i mi lu mi prami do cusku > > Is completely grammatical text, and parses exactly as though a {li'u} > had been included between {do} and {cusku}. You may not like the > style, but I assert that that is only because you have not > internalized the grammar. > > Nonetheless, it's probably legitimate to assume that those cases are > rare. Particularly, it seems completely fair (hypothetically) to make > a parser that exhibits sub-optimal performance in those unusual cases > (reparsing all of the above bridi, instead of just the {mi prami do} > part, for instance). > > The continuations approach feels more right in general, though. > > > > > Based on that, and the fact that it's expected the user is going to be > > typing more, it's reasonable to assume for the sake of as-you-type > parsing, > > they aren't elided if they aren't in the text, as it's assumed that the > end > > of current input is not the end of text. > > > > In something like {lu ko'a broda to brodi ko'e li'u}, the {li'u} marks > the > > end of the quoted text, so you'd have to allow for that.... > > > >> > >> * Should the person make the third parser anyway while making LIhU, > >> TOI, and TUhE *required and non-elidable*? > > > > I say yes, but since that's not official, I should say no. Then again, if > > the third parser /assumes/ non-elidability, I doubt it will cause > problems. > > > > Alternatively, you can cause the third parser to assume > current-end-of-input > > is always equal to terminate-everything-unterminated, and that should > work > > out fine. > > > >> > >> * Is there another practical solution for the editor? > > > > .alyn.'s idea sounds pretty good to me. > > > >> > >> Remember, the problem is that the hypothetical text editor is getting > >> slow because otherwise it needs to parse the entire text for every > >> edit. > > > > Something tells me this "hypothetical" parser isn't very hypothetical. :D > > > > -- > > mu'o mi'e .aionys. > > > > .i.a'o.e'e ko cmima le bende pe lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.luk. mi patfu > do > > zo'o > > (Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D ) > > > > -- > > 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@googlegroups.com > . > > For more options, visit this group at > > http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en. > > > > -- > 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@googlegroups.com > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en. > > -- 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@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en. --0022152d5fb5d228940492abc996 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
.i mi lu mi prami do cusku

Is completely gramma= tical text, and parses exactly as though a {li'u}
had been includ= ed between {do} and {cusku}.

That's bizarre. =A0I didn't realize that {lu} was that permiss= ive. =A0I just assumed that it would suck up everything up till you hit {li= 'u} and if doing so hit something ungrammatical (like {mi prami do cusk= u}) then it=A0would be ungrammatical and you just should have used {= lo'u}.

<= span class=3D"Apple-style-span" style=3D"border-collapse: collapse;">Well t= hat's one that I'll have to keep in mind in the future.

On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 12:40 = PM, Adam Lopresto <adamlopresto@gmail.com> wrote:
>> * Is it true that the fact that LIhU, TOI, and T= UhE are elidable makes
>> isolating an utterance impossible without completely parsing the t= ext
>> the utterance is in? (Just making sure.)
>
> I'm not entirely sure what enables those to be elided, but I belie= ve that
> such cases are rare, like only-at-the-end-of-text rare. Also, there ar= e
> various people, me, .xorxes., possibly others I don't know, who fe= el that
> they should /never/ be elidable anyway.

Those are elidable for exactly the reason that every other terminator=
in the language is elidable, and in exactly the same way. The only
usual thing is that those can include {.i} inside them, while most
others cannot. (LEhU and ZOI are the other considerations; not also ZO
and the rest of the Magic Words).

.i mi lu mi prami do cusku

Is completely grammatical text, and parses exactly as though a {li'u} had been included between {do} and {cusku}. You may not like the
style, but I assert that that is only because you have not
internalized the grammar.

Nonetheless, it's probably legitimate to assume that those cases are rare. Particularly, it seems completely fair (hypothetically) to make
a parser that exhibits sub-optimal performance in those unusual cases
(reparsing all of the above bridi, instead of just the {mi prami do}
part, for instance).

The continuations approach feels more right in general, though.

>
> Based on that, and the fact that it's expected the user is going t= o be
> typing more, it's reasonable to assume for the sake of as-you-type= parsing,
> they aren't elided if they aren't in the text, as it's ass= umed that the end
> of current input is not the end of text.
>
> In something like {lu ko'a broda to brodi ko'e li'u}, the = {li'u} marks the
> end of the quoted text, so you'd have to allow for that....
>
>>
>> * Should the person make the third parser anyway while making LIhU= ,
>> TOI, and TUhE *required and non-elidable*?
>
> I say yes, but since that's not official, I should say no. Then ag= ain, if
> the third parser /assumes/ non-elidability, I doubt it will cause prob= lems.
>
> Alternatively, you can cause the third parser to assume current-end-of= -input
> is always equal to terminate-everything-unterminated, and that should = work
> out fine.
>
>>
>> * Is there another practical solution for the editor?
>
> .alyn.'s idea sounds pretty good to me.
>
>>
>> Remember, the problem is that the hypothetical text editor is gett= ing
>> slow because otherwise it needs to parse the entire text for every=
>> edit.
>
> Something tells me this "hypothetical" parser isn't very= hypothetical. :D
>
> --
> mu'o mi'e .aionys.
>
> .i.a'o.e'e ko cmima le bende pe lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.lu= k. mi patfu do
> zo'o
> (Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D )
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Gro= ups
> "lojban" group.
> To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> lojban+unsubs= cribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=3Den.
>

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


--
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.
--0022152d5fb5d228940492abc996--