From lojban+bncCK30vq5WEMnil-kEGgRU6Vea@googlegroups.com Thu Jan 06 08:44:08 2011 Received: from mail-pw0-f61.google.com ([209.85.160.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PaswV-0004p6-Tb; Thu, 06 Jan 2011 08:44:07 -0800 Received: by pwi2 with SMTP id 2sf5142773pwi.16 for ; Thu, 06 Jan 2011 08:43:58 -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=LEQD/LhITXnyonzEPsFSOJYOqip36pjETc3zRv65au8=; b=dR5wv/YHuklxFBytULfsakY9dtwL8YQfl8yXh8dWLFswZDzkoAN1de76KKrIK0kHmf c2EB+BnKcHWihkx3+fuk6dXC8X0tyQMZE7bVuqZJ86M0aBjUPqUzmpV4nTyceAZFver5 gO9V69Q5I0kPqrIXhM6TzE+ZYaNc7Xtqi5OdQ= 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=HacrICaGo7G355Y+dQnM8PKGz216/qcqzE74edSXEKJw+AnCScc20A/My9InzaUHTT VYatx5wq/0fwIqGma4lHdR/7AW/tL7pU4Nzvt5d/joItTBl2wxka2wJ41FujkSOntcW1 V3dyqJ09gcKy3imPjAhi5140NJrJxkNghjX+o= Received: by 10.143.26.32 with SMTP id d32mr78774wfj.16.1294332233823; Thu, 06 Jan 2011 08:43:53 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.142.97.18 with SMTP id u18ls1272847wfb.2.p; Thu, 06 Jan 2011 08:43:52 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.156.15 with SMTP id d15mr896117wfe.69.1294332232069; Thu, 06 Jan 2011 08:43:52 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.156.15 with SMTP id d15mr896116wfe.69.1294332232046; Thu, 06 Jan 2011 08:43:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org (digitalkingdom.org [173.13.139.234]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id f13si1169705wfo.0.2011.01.06.08.43.51 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Thu, 06 Jan 2011 08:43:51 -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 1PaswJ-0004oy-34 for lojban@googlegroups.com; Thu, 06 Jan 2011 08:43:51 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2011 08:43:51 -0800 From: Robin Lee Powell To: lojban@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] *-no-SA-handling in PEG grammar Message-ID: <20110106164350.GX17534@digitalkingdom.org> References: <20110106141506.GA27424@134.sub-75-208-112.myvzw.com> <20110106145108.GS17534@digitalkingdom.org> <20110106154013.GB27505@alice.local> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20110106154013.GB27505@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 Thu, Jan 06, 2011 at 08:40:13AM -0700, .alyn.post. wrote: > On Thu, Jan 06, 2011 at 06:51:08AM -0800, Robin Lee Powell wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 06, 2011 at 07:15:06AM -0700, .alyn.post. wrote: > > > There are several productions of the form *-no-SA-handling, > > > (BAI-no-SA-handling, BAhE-no-SA-handling, &c) in the Lojban PEG > > > grammar. > > > > > > I can't see that any of these productions are referenced by other > > > productions in the grammar. What are these rules? It seems that > > > removing them would have no effect on the parser. > > > > These appear to be a side effect of how SA handling used to work; > > diffs back to the version in question attached. I've updated the > > source to remove them. > > > > After doing the same against my tree, I have discovered that the > following rules are in the same class (unreferenced productions), > but don't match the pattern '*-no-SA-handling': Took me a while to figure this out because it's cascading. > pre-zei-bu-no-SA > bu-clause-no-SA > BU-clause-no-SA > BU-pre-no-SA > LEhU-clause-no-SA > LEhU-pre-no-SA > zei-clause-no-SA > ZEI-clause-no-SA > ZEI-pre-no-SA > > I believe they can be removed too. I agree. I made a small script to check for others after those were gone; I didn't find any. -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.