From lojban+bncCLr6ktCfBBCWsIzxBBoEAiTH7g@googlegroups.com Sun Jul 17 10:13:07 2011 Received: from mail-pz0-f56.google.com ([209.85.210.56]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QiUts-0007Z2-O0; Sun, 17 Jul 2011 10:13:07 -0700 Received: by pzk33 with SMTP id 33sf5702583pzk.1 for ; Sun, 17 Jul 2011 10:12:59 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; 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:x-google-group-id:list-post :list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe :content-type:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding; bh=p1R4T8FVBamuibHvVuvO7F6PFWWtQRnVMX02P8ebY6E=; b=3Y9WxzCt4Ryh02j1ZhhWk3+7CIjdIG4RsFFVczcikGKalfIfFSLLWYbh2xkOOMiiRd j8OpQAcdkhK4RBHDR9kstCemkvitfyvpmHaPseMZTosU0D+EDqghPH3Z2LYrJTxDMXdp 0Ao9o026x6zCeEQ6tvzD+vSZk1Z5lFOuWauNE= Received: by 10.68.27.9 with SMTP id p9mr1334039pbg.34.1310922774497; Sun, 17 Jul 2011 10:12:54 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.68.33.193 with SMTP id t1ls2890516pbi.0.gmail; Sun, 17 Jul 2011 10:12:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.30.10 with SMTP id o10mr1287759pbh.46.1310922773920; Sun, 17 Jul 2011 10:12:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.30.10 with SMTP id o10mr1287758pbh.46.1310922773911; Sun, 17 Jul 2011 10:12:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pz0-f50.google.com (mail-pz0-f50.google.com [209.85.210.50]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id a1si4448976pbs.1.2011.07.17.10.12.52 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sun, 17 Jul 2011 10:12:52 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 209.85.210.50 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of alanpost@sunflowerriver.org) client-ip=209.85.210.50; Received: by mail-pz0-f50.google.com with SMTP id 2so4017783pzk.23 for ; Sun, 17 Jul 2011 10:12:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.56.138 with SMTP id a10mr6727084pbq.475.1310922772765; Sun, 17 Jul 2011 10:12:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sunflowerriver.org (c-107-4-38-56.hsd1.nm.comcast.net [107.4.38.56]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id b4sm1995538pba.59.2011.07.17.10.12.50 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sun, 17 Jul 2011 10:12:51 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2011 11:12:48 -0600 From: ".alyn.post." To: lojban@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Yet another PEG question ... Message-ID: <20110717171248.GB46784@alice.local> Mail-Followup-To: lojban@googlegroups.com References: <20110717171041.GA46784@alice.local> Mime-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20110717171041.GA46784@alice.local> X-Original-Sender: alyn.post@lodockikumazvati.org X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 209.85.210.50 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: X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417 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 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 11:10:41AM -0600, .alyn.post. wrote: > On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 01:41:26PM -0300, Jorge Llamb=EDas wrote: > > On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 12:44 PM, Frank wrot= e: > > > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0NORATS CMAVO-word-pre <- " CMAVO=3D( " > > > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0NORATS CMAVO <- CMAVO-word-pre inner-word close-paren > > > /If/, and this is a big 'if', I understand correctly, such lines mean > > > a parser attempting to find a cmavo in a portion of lojban text shoul= d > > > look for (literal) "CMAVO=3D(" followed by some other text followed b= y a > > > literal ")", which would suggest some form of pre-interpretation of > > > said lojban text before parsing. But how could such be? Would not the > > > purpose of the parser be to perform such interpretation? > >=20 > > In his implementation of the PEG, Robin divided the grammar into two > > stages, morphology and syntax. The output of the morphology stage > > produced something containing such things as "CMAVO=3D( da )" and then > > the syntax part worked with that output. There's no need to do this > > other than resolving some practical concern of that implementation. > > The official PEG (when we have it) should not have such things. > >=20 >=20 > jbgenturfa'i does not include these productions, and instead "more > directly" interfaces with the morphology by treating the morphology > and grammar as a single PEG grammar. The behavior above was so > Robin and xorxes could work and debug together; and perhaps for > other reasons. Exactly as xorxes said, they aren't needed and are > an artifact of camxes. >=20 > Will you talk a little about what you're doing? So far your > questions are exactly the ones I asked, when I started using camxes, > and the answers I got then are now included in jbogenturfa'i. >=20 I'm sorry, I was reading my e-mail in reverse order, and I see you have answered this question. -Alan --=20 .i ma'a lo bradi cu penmi gi'e du --=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.