From lojban+bncCLr6ktCfBBDb1I7oBBoE2mhsEw@googlegroups.com Sat Dec 11 08:44:33 2010 Received: from mail-px0-f189.google.com ([209.85.212.189]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PRSYY-0007qs-4r; Sat, 11 Dec 2010 08:44:32 -0800 Received: by pxi19 with SMTP id 19sf1506908pxi.16 for ; Sat, 11 Dec 2010 08:44:16 -0800 (PST) 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=aDQRlyy9aTvttaSpX4Q6jtoVC/sNKNNp1PkleO21L8c=; b=pqocf2xWRAiqWRDXPadC29XW4uPk6+NU4R/224W0emNBVgo+AB1wIJL/0z1eq2XCdn tErZEmPN0iL5zMdGqYYvWm5ZwZuWohuyFyQ9/JpEtZD+S1y94EydBHo52a7MyZqcMNuX dFFAUVXm14WKRvwOWo7+isJndeUj63SNVy8Xg= 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=6y5GafxNkPS/7FQzMQmgmdEGZCMmNfc2M5ATURu2nsccshQfcq4z028Mwt11Q4Ex6L fEGk1cyPw1p/ywQQjqaxGt/6bUckIOwMq2vHgU0X54qi4hRJL2A9evbcgcqMQ+zj8Icm nwbmjnaJMGYbqeD28LnWk7AQSH8GRPxbZ3VNA= Received: by 10.142.149.20 with SMTP id w20mr98890wfd.52.1292085851956; Sat, 11 Dec 2010 08:44:11 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.142.224.15 with SMTP id w15ls1432632wfg.3.p; Sat, 11 Dec 2010 08:44:11 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.143.6.15 with SMTP id j15mr1546074wfi.19.1292085851403; Sat, 11 Dec 2010 08:44:11 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.143.6.15 with SMTP id j15mr1546073wfi.19.1292085851382; Sat, 11 Dec 2010 08:44:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-px0-f172.google.com (mail-px0-f172.google.com [209.85.212.172]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id y8si4815340wfj.5.2010.12.11.08.44.11; Sat, 11 Dec 2010 08:44:11 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 209.85.212.172 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of alanpost@sunflowerriver.org) client-ip=209.85.212.172; Received: by pxi6 with SMTP id 6so1997337pxi.17 for ; Sat, 11 Dec 2010 08:44:11 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.133.13 with SMTP id g13mr1499955wfd.443.1292085851150; Sat, 11 Dec 2010 08:44:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from sunflowerriver.org (c-68-35-167-179.hsd1.nm.comcast.net [68.35.167.179]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id b11sm5848711wff.21.2010.12.11.08.44.08 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sat, 11 Dec 2010 08:44:09 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2010 09:44:05 -0700 From: ".alyn.post." To: lojban@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Lojban CFG Questions Message-ID: <20101211164405.GA18570@alice.local> Mail-Followup-To: lojban@googlegroups.com References: <201012101024.39320.roman_naumann@fastmail.fm> <4D03599A.1090403@lojban.org> <20101211163218.GR27025@digitalkingdom.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20101211163218.GR27025@digitalkingdom.org> X-Original-Sender: alyn.post@lodockikumazvati.org X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 209.85.212.172 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 On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 08:32:18AM -0800, Robin Lee Powell wrote: > On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 05:59:38AM -0500, Bob LeChevalier, President > and Founder - LLG wrote: > > > > I don't know the answer to your questions, but the guy who > > developed the elidable terminator formalization, > > It's not a formalization; that's the whole point here. The yacc > version "handles" them by erroring out and running some code to > handle the errors. > Do you know what camxes or jbofi'e do in this case? Is it the same behavior? Why should we not formally define this behavior, introduce a /syntax/ for it, and solve the problem from that direction? What about the situation don't I understand that makes that problematic? -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 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.