From lojban+bncCLr6ktCfBBC33o7oBBoELx6tLw@googlegroups.com Sat Dec 11 09:05:12 2010 Received: from mail-gx0-f189.google.com ([209.85.161.189]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PRSsc-0003UM-At; Sat, 11 Dec 2010 09:05:11 -0800 Received: by gxk19 with SMTP id 19sf3642287gxk.16 for ; Sat, 11 Dec 2010 09:04:59 -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=9On3WEKlZeJqkfYT7VJajWujrveI6nONR2Z8ch26uPE=; b=tLbrvNxHyiYTCsWAv7II3hEPMWyS+vEtjHLM8oQtTeNX6MA5hvHHqfmpj68QQBcIFI rjrBYdrYPuPBZRw9MfQ+PUjkIqoSmR+sC17g3BIUN1EqR7oJxE0pG21AVrmVjPMcUtZA KhWqMZMi7bMVbRncvy57wNKpswPppH9sNxBaw= 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=vvthv+gR8u13RfD0adYeEvslP67TE55XkLwhbmE53EZJ8lstCt2jEA+JfGm8a2xMTD Bwz6L0RKbxW/yN7jCeJ2KvLa3+u7fzWy7LxbDlhc9RS75XVPAZsPXkuXGn1zPzJrl6VW 88ZyIWr9lfv/YkGD0acdWQLrrFT/W2i56FLcE= Received: by 10.151.125.10 with SMTP id c10mr181651ybn.61.1292087095194; Sat, 11 Dec 2010 09:04:55 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.150.6.39 with SMTP id 39ls2724509ybf.4.p; Sat, 11 Dec 2010 09:04:54 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.151.148.1 with SMTP id a1mr491298ybo.12.1292087094446; Sat, 11 Dec 2010 09:04:54 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.151.148.1 with SMTP id a1mr491297ybo.12.1292087094417; Sat, 11 Dec 2010 09:04:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-gy0-f176.google.com (mail-gy0-f176.google.com [209.85.160.176]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id q2si602967ybe.8.2010.12.11.09.04.54; Sat, 11 Dec 2010 09:04:54 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 209.85.160.176 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of alanpost@sunflowerriver.org) client-ip=209.85.160.176; Received: by gyf1 with SMTP id 1so2770106gyf.21 for ; Sat, 11 Dec 2010 09:04:54 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.90.72.20 with SMTP id u20mr2776929aga.145.1292087093598; Sat, 11 Dec 2010 09:04:53 -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 2sm4854043anw.18.2010.12.11.09.04.51 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sat, 11 Dec 2010 09:04:52 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2010 10:04:49 -0700 From: ".alyn.post." To: lojban@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Lojban CFG Questions Message-ID: <20101211170449.GB18570@alice.local> Mail-Followup-To: lojban@googlegroups.com References: <201012101024.39320.roman_naumann@fastmail.fm> <4D03599A.1090403@lojban.org> <20101211163218.GR27025@digitalkingdom.org> <20101211164405.GA18570@alice.local> <20101211165142.GS27025@digitalkingdom.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20101211165142.GS27025@digitalkingdom.org> X-Original-Sender: alyn.post@lodockikumazvati.org X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 209.85.160.176 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 08:51:42AM -0800, Robin Lee Powell wrote: > 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. > Having spent the last months with my head thoroughly in PEG, I have been looking at this problem and wondering what the fuss was about. Thank you, this clears it up for me. > > 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). > I suspect if there is a way, it is by studying that grammar and finding patterns of shared structure that can be optimized into fewer rules. -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.