From lojban+bncCJ2UzZHuDRCt6JzqBBoEF38gKQ@googlegroups.com Mon Jan 31 14:14:22 2011 Received: from mail-wy0-f189.google.com ([74.125.82.189]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Pk20o-0005fp-4X; Mon, 31 Jan 2011 14:14:22 -0800 Received: by wyb35 with SMTP id 35sf6649138wyb.16 for ; Mon, 31 Jan 2011 14:14:11 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version :in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from: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-transfer-encoding; bh=P4nGsGR3sE0nTn2RPMvyI3oxZApIB3U0xesZl4HuVew=; b=LUzo+DxLGVZjVJ6evaF4vEOl7RG57qE5Nh35fyHA8blzuGxENuY0sNv5zy3vixl3iv wZC2mnFeBQ4rNRg91PZxnM9/oCOqvbyiXWuh5kS6wQwlPQhjmUs7Z+BqUanrpdlYhk8e qU9b0fJoxxFSlEKYm+m1d/R1AJMZzlYgfAfn8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from: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-transfer-encoding; b=1b2QJLWeRiVPVTqJwesMHpnWy8lPf3jDMCzFxmGvJuy7vuTNBnfr4HY0ofsVbAnJmU gBdFQddWBunKQmS+JT1nqAJrDoO5JYcMVQ18Jodw13Ql23pzfDcu2Qwig/xepXGa22gQ R0wstY+T9gCtbJDWGQpFR+Gm5p9fLXFoH/PGQ= Received: by 10.216.179.137 with SMTP id h9mr1304879wem.4.1296512045954; Mon, 31 Jan 2011 14:14:05 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.216.63.11 with SMTP id z11ls31279wec.1.p; Mon, 31 Jan 2011 14:14:05 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.216.254.9 with SMTP id g9mr438877wes.13.1296512044922; Mon, 31 Jan 2011 14:14:04 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.216.254.9 with SMTP id g9mr438876wes.13.1296512044861; Mon, 31 Jan 2011 14:14:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ww0-f49.google.com (mail-ww0-f49.google.com [74.125.82.49]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id p4si2327308weq.4.2011.01.31.14.14.03 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Mon, 31 Jan 2011 14:14:03 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.49 as permitted sender) client-ip=74.125.82.49; Received: by wwb17 with SMTP id 17so6289543wwb.6 for ; Mon, 31 Jan 2011 14:14:03 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.227.132.149 with SMTP id b21mr6221728wbt.48.1296512043685; Mon, 31 Jan 2011 14:14:03 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.227.54.10 with HTTP; Mon, 31 Jan 2011 14:14:03 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20110131150504.GA49994@alice.local> References: <20110131150504.GA49994@alice.local> Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 19:14:03 -0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] confusion over FUhE-post PEG grammar rule From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?= To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: jjllambias@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.49 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=jjllambias@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.com 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-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 12:05 PM, .alyn.post. wrote: > I'm confused over the intent of the FUhE-post production in the PEG > grammar: > > FUhE-clause <- FUhE-pre FUhE-post > FUhE-pre =A0 =A0<- pre-clause FUhE spaces? > FUhE-post =A0 <- !BU-clause spaces? !ZEI-clause !BU-clause Probably a remnant of an older version where it did something. > The ! predicate does not advance the input, so if you walk through > each rule in the FUhE-post production, you try to: > > =A0* not match BU-clause. =A0If we find one, we no-match This immediatel= y > =A0 and stop checking. =A0The input isn't advanced if we non-match it. The idea is that "fu'e bu" will not match FUhE-clause. I don't think this ever comes into play though. This applies to the !BU-clause !ZEI-clause in post-clause as well. If I'm not mistaken they ccould be removed. > =A0* the spaces? production will always match the empty string, as > =A0 FUhE-post only appears in FUhE-clause, and FUhE-pre, the rule > =A0 before it, ends with a spaces? This also applies to the spaces? in post-clause. If I'm not mistaken, it never gets a chance to grab any spaces. > =A0* not match ZEI-clause. =A0If we find ZEI-clause, we immediately > =A0 stop checking. =A0If we don't find one, the input is not advanced. > =A0* not match BU-clause. =A0This is where I get confused. =A0We haven't > =A0 advanced the token stream, and we've already checked for a > =A0 BU-clause earlier. Right, it's redundant. But I think even the first one is doing nothing. > The final !BU-clause is either: > > =A0* redundant > =A0* should be something like !(ZEI-clause BU-clause) What for? > Anything I missed? Probably not. Remember that the PEG has never really been optimized, and it has gone through some changes, especially concerning magic words. mu'o mi'e xorxes --=20 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@googlegrou= ps.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban= ?hl=3Den.