From lojban+bncCLr6ktCfBBDaurnpBBoEYCxIrw@googlegroups.com Wed Jan 12 18:03:21 2011 Received: from mail-gw0-f61.google.com ([74.125.83.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PdCWz-0006vQ-UP; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 18:03:21 -0800 Received: by gwj17 with SMTP id 17sf851716gwj.16 for ; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 18:03:12 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature: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; bh=/OHFyqXCXtBp9ikiqCKPZSEN9zGAV9a8Ja4z3l9m6pk=; b=W3EfSfwic59c0Ctk7Je1toV/zZOb1YaCQvqEi2CGqzAU3EBJSNdj554asL9sxj1wSs /QWbrbjn/MX90Bdgikc+HOGg8RHlZdhCEfalUVIU88KZiBiTglO1PjHPJA2zF3jJUuAp Pq2Fs2nIWVRzmo8g8XBcUUmChB+Upzj5/kYiQ= 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=t6Hx/8j7cUY+4Do/VZYXpfYs4aeJBnX5w1BAxEyDWEvkHlAxB11HmUBfHKMVEB0qKK KKa4vxBlc5+ymWScjmklX0JGZszkokuzng9cU5l0e1SPfyt4f7u4ka2EhbsnZiPvPqWq WgWV1qDOVqWi9tYj3OOWNzgZ44B1YxFgssOko= Received: by 10.90.99.20 with SMTP id w20mr179734agb.34.1294884186688; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 18:03:06 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.100.56.38 with SMTP id e38ls220692ana.3.p; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 18:03:06 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.100.13.10 with SMTP id 10mr406210anm.30.1294884134620; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 18:02:14 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.100.13.10 with SMTP id 10mr406072anm.30.1294884087837; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 18:01:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-yi0-f44.google.com (mail-yi0-f44.google.com [209.85.218.44]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id 28si431204anv.0.2011.01.12.18.01.27; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 18:01:27 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 209.85.218.44 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of alanpost@sunflowerriver.org) client-ip=209.85.218.44; Received: by yie19 with SMTP id 19so571261yie.31 for ; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 18:01:27 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.150.204.7 with SMTP id b7mr3005843ybg.126.1294884087542; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 18:01:27 -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 v8sm937576ybe.1.2011.01.12.18.01.25 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Wed, 12 Jan 2011 18:01:26 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 19:01:23 -0700 From: ".alyn.post." To: lojban@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] inconsistency between PEG grammar and CLL 17.4 Message-ID: <20110113020123.GD1262@alice.local> Mail-Followup-To: lojban@googlegroups.com References: <20110113012524.GC1262@alice.local> <20110113014322.GW2132@digitalkingdom.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20110113014322.GW2132@digitalkingdom.org> X-Original-Sender: alyn.post@lodockikumazvati.org X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 209.85.218.44 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 Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 05:43:22PM -0800, Robin Lee Powell wrote: > On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 06:25:24PM -0700, .alyn.post. wrote: > > [This fell out of my researching SA. tl;dr: I've found two bugs > > in BU handling in the PEG grammar.] > > The CLL *repeatedly* contradicts itself, including in the YACC > instructions, on how to handle the various Magic Words. This is why > http://www.lojban.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Magic+Words exists. > The email threads leading to that were ... extensive. > > I do not consider the CLL, YACC, or EBNF relevant or authoritative > on this issue, since they all contradict each other; all current > explorations should be relative to that page. If you want to use > one of those sources for evidence that that page is wrong, be my > guest, but we've probably been there already. > I don't understand this statement on the Magic Words page: BAhE marks the following word but does not change its nature, and does not bind with it. I would undertand "does not bind with it" to mean that ba'e bu is in fact illegal, since "bu" alone doesn't parse, and ba'e doesn't change the nature of bu. I've added a note to the errata section for the CLL that I hope someone with a better understanding that my statement can correct. > > -> si bu > > [ shouldn't and doesn't parse ] > > > > -> sa bu > > [ shouldn't and doesn't parse ] > > > > -> su bu > > text > > buClauseNoPre > > |- CMAVO > > | SU: su > > |- CMAVO > > BU: bu > > > > Now wait just a minute here. The rule above *explicitily forbids* > > SU. How is it that it is matching? > > I *think* this is the only case you found where the PEG contradicts > the Magic Words page. Yep, that's a bug; I'd love it if you'd > suggest a fix/patch. > I'll get you one as soon as I'm far enough along to properly test it. I'll push it to you this time. ;-) -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.