From lojban+bncCLr6ktCfBBC-zqzmBBoEXfMF-Q@googlegroups.com Fri Oct 29 12:58:04 2010 Received: from mail-gx0-f189.google.com ([209.85.161.189]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PBv5N-0001gJ-KM; Fri, 29 Oct 2010 12:58:04 -0700 Received: by gxk28 with SMTP id 28sf4941434gxk.16 for ; Fri, 29 Oct 2010 12:57:55 -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:received:received:date:from:to :subject:message-id:mail-followup-to:references:mime-version :in-reply-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 :content-disposition; bh=3VPdTU5blGTrPE7zqhRPluTwMIP1bX4h+T36LALzPck=; b=bmJoC+xbopec6Sbmu3PT0m345LmRec6pss7JvKpfp3DcGFKipOQSNXxlM7ihjcYT18 AvpwlcW7qqOVZN//ttleAhuPe4++yN0IPL4wZq9MzL8r0blJiElOH8YnxeMYDnHP0JZN He24q9nSDncFW7OhRgi2JuDjTif0nED1wa7C8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:date:from:to:subject:message-id :mail-followup-to:references:mime-version:in-reply-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 :content-disposition; b=uARHRGs67l4KojZqkZREGiAmrU1bb6NWzTBGebhPSfFsoMW3SJuYaN0075QRVledW6 TlOS2BHtaKwA1uKY5swByDVyjydOrkVtaajwKscKJLHDEMiMKKedPMOncCwRMJ0y7Nm0 H2LJ4iS3a2RfQhWszvd5pSSOn5T5KxsajTLZ8= Received: by 10.150.172.7 with SMTP id u7mr1941874ybe.55.1288382270106; Fri, 29 Oct 2010 12:57:50 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.150.102.24 with SMTP id z24ls1799881ybb.3.p; Fri, 29 Oct 2010 12:57:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.150.148.15 with SMTP id v15mr3872320ybd.4.1288382269581; Fri, 29 Oct 2010 12:57:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.150.148.15 with SMTP id v15mr3872319ybd.4.1288382269555; Fri, 29 Oct 2010 12:57:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yx0-f174.google.com (mail-yx0-f174.google.com [209.85.213.174]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id q8si820079ybk.0.2010.10.29.12.57.49; Fri, 29 Oct 2010 12:57:49 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 209.85.213.174 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of alanpost@sunflowerriver.org) client-ip=209.85.213.174; Received: by yxk8 with SMTP id 8so1982004yxk.33 for ; Fri, 29 Oct 2010 12:57:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.151.144.8 with SMTP id w8mr3596985ybn.430.1288382269349; Fri, 29 Oct 2010 12:57:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sunflowerriver.org (173-10-243-253-Albuquerque.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [173.10.243.253]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id v39sm7047540yba.7.2010.10.29.12.57.47 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Fri, 29 Oct 2010 12:57:48 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2010 13:57:44 -0600 From: ".alyn.post." To: lojban@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] questions about peg grammar Message-ID: <20101029195744.GJ47249@alice.local> Mail-Followup-To: lojban@googlegroups.com References: <20101029194001.GI47249@alice.local> Mime-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: X-Original-Sender: alyn.post@lodockikumazvati.org X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 209.85.213.174 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of alanpost@sunflowerriver.org) smtp.mail=alanpost@sunflowerriver.org 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: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Presuming your ',' character is the ordered-choice predicate (the '/' in the Lojban grammar) you're totally right. Your description does not work if you're talking about the sequence predicate, because the predicate-not operator is working on the input stream, rather than directly modifying the rules, which is how you're articulating how it works in your description. If that doesn't make sense I'll write up an example, but for your example below you've understood the correct behavior. -Alan On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 03:51:11PM -0400, Luke Bergen wrote: > oh, interesting. So the !fuhivla, !gismu, and the rest will effectively > modify what "bridi-core" is such that a bridi-core (in the context of a > lujvo) will not have fuivla, gismu, or cmavo in it. > Interesting. So if I have > stuff <- !dogs !tabby animal > animal <- dogs, cats, mice > cats <- barn-cat, tabby > then "stuff" will be a class of things that contains "barn-cat and mice". > Is this right? > On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 3:40 PM, .alyn.post. > <[1]alyn.post@lodockikumazvati.org> wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 03:36:09PM -0400, Luke Bergen wrote: > > Ok, so I'm trying to get a feel for how the peg grammar handles lujvo > so > > that I can make my parser be as close to the real deal as possible > (i.e. > > not a sloppy hack). I have a question though. I think the relevant > section > > that I want to understand is the following, correct? > > > ;----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > lujvo <- !gismu !fuhivla !cmavo initial-rafsi* brivla-core > > brivla-core <- fuhivla / gismu / CVV-final-rafsi / > stressed-initial-rafsi > > short-final-rafsi > > stressed-initial-rafsi <- stressed-extended-rafsi / stressed-y-rafsi / > > stressed-y-less-rafsi > > initial-rafsi <- extended-rafsi / y-rafsi / !any-extended-rafsi > > y-less-rafsi > > any-extended-rafsi <- fuhivla / extended-rafsi / > stressed-extended-rafsi > > > ;----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Now, I may be reading this incorrectly, but wouldn't this mean that an > > initial rafsi followed by a fuhivla would be considered a lujvo? i.e. > > {bracidrspageti}? > > > > This is a bit tricky. > > Look at the early part of the lujvo definition, and you can see > there is a predicate-not operation saying "it can't have a fuhivla" > (That is the !fuhivla). > > So when the brivla-core matches, even through brivla-core is capable > of having a fuhivla, it won't ever have one in this case, because > the earlier predicate-not operation in the lujvo nonterminal won't let > one be there. > > -Alan > -- > .i ko djuno fi le do sevzi > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "lojban" group. > To post to this group, send email to [2]lojban@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [3]lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > [4]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. > > References > > Visible links > 1. mailto:alyn.post@lodockikumazvati.org > 2. mailto:lojban@googlegroups.com > 3. mailto:lojban%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com > 4. http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en -- .i ko djuno fi le do sevzi -- 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.