From lojban+bncCK30vq5WEKLYjugEGgTtlDOA@googlegroups.com Sat Dec 11 08:52:00 2010 Received: from mail-pw0-f61.google.com ([209.85.160.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PRSfs-0002l1-IH; Sat, 11 Dec 2010 08:52:00 -0800 Received: by pwi2 with SMTP id 2sf1531482pwi.16 for ; Sat, 11 Dec 2010 08:51:50 -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:date:from:to:subject:message-id :references:mime-version:in-reply-to:user-agent: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=IwFfqDyfAdbk2ZZjT5BgglQbIDTLIrU7SCrsNNANcPg=; b=0fmCfVAc1AwwtXKVaNARM2RbdIPpv38UqvHg+kxChvALeLyq01L8cC6aprnDzVJfuB UoJMd0QF0+KbTBwDzDhdtCj5KCxxHs5PItLZ8dNrgL3lZY7LORsFHyZa1skc5jJ3v4SG KgX80/bOQuvMp06emXNo1DBwpR9ne7tOnnGCc= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:date:from:to:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:in-reply-to:user-agent: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=jp7bkuVyLFSrKZRNyp1TZo+MPbyYEomGtTsrul+UjfzQplAxxr//lLzz1ovux4hyOu I7gFaf5XzcB4yNMAVl+bfn8icXpTJuHPBPL+78eXcXRWZLGBNpZvBEg1i4GbYz/zCh9T /wxEHD5aEJ1jnMW+iSDqlYHlVA67ZixfgDLao= Received: by 10.142.152.27 with SMTP id z27mr95305wfd.66.1292086306289; Sat, 11 Dec 2010 08:51:46 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.142.249.41 with SMTP id w41ls5359191wfh.1.p; Sat, 11 Dec 2010 08:51:43 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.165.19 with SMTP id n19mr1550551wfe.32.1292086303467; Sat, 11 Dec 2010 08:51:43 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.165.19 with SMTP id n19mr1550550wfe.32.1292086303434; Sat, 11 Dec 2010 08:51:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org (digitalkingdom.org [173.13.139.234]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id p40si4826519wfc.2.2010.12.11.08.51.43; Sat, 11 Dec 2010 08:51:43 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org designates 173.13.139.234 as permitted sender) client-ip=173.13.139.234; Received: from rlpowell by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PRSfe-0002kh-Fp for lojban@googlegroups.com; Sat, 11 Dec 2010 08:51:42 -0800 Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2010 08:51:42 -0800 From: Robin Lee Powell To: lojban@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Lojban CFG Questions Message-ID: <20101211165142.GS27025@digitalkingdom.org> References: <201012101024.39320.roman_naumann@fastmail.fm> <4D03599A.1090403@lojban.org> <20101211163218.GR27025@digitalkingdom.org> <20101211164405.GA18570@alice.local> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20101211164405.GA18570@alice.local> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-Original-Sender: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org designates 173.13.139.234 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=rlpowell@digitalkingdom.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 09:44:05AM -0700, .alyn.post. wrote: > 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? camxes is PEG; PEG has no problems with the elidable terminators. AFAIK, jbofihe uses the error trick. > Why should we not formally define this behavior, introduce a > /syntax/ for it, and solve the problem from that direction? Long since been done; see the EBNF linked from http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/hobbies/lojban/grammar/ (and the rest of that page) > What about the situation don't I understand that makes that > problematic? No-one knows how to make a CFG that does elidable terminators (or so I thought; xorxes showed a method I have not evaluated, but it has combinatorial explosion of rules, which is no better). CFGs are better understood than PEGs, so as a formalism they are somewhat preferable. -Robin -- http://singinst.org/ : Our last, best hope for a fantastic future. Lojban (http://www.lojban.org/): The language in which "this parrot is dead" is "ti poi spitaki cu morsi", but "this sentence is false" is "na nei". My personal page: http://www.digitalkingdom.org/rlp/ -- 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.