Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:400c:c00::233 as permitted sender) client-ip=2a00:1450:400c:c00::233;
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Gleki Arxokuna <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2015 09:39:06 +0300
Message-ID: <CAO7bV+iL3NUy3An9Oyba9SWH7oOQqyu7VN3N1bLAaqt49HvqUQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: [bpfk] Does Lojban PEG need a "naughty OR" operator?
To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c3aa5856a7eb0513088f88
Reply-To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list bpfk-list@googlegroups.com; contact bpfk-list+owners@googlegroups.com
Sender: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com
X-Spam_score: -1.7
X-Spam_score_int: -16
X-Spam_bar: -
Content-Length: 4850

--001a11c3aa5856a7eb0513088f88
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

There is a language.js <http://tolmasky.github.io/language/> PEG library
that adds a new " % " operator ("naughty OR") used only if the parse
completely fails.
This " % " can be used to show all errors in the tree. Finding the first
error doesn't stop the tree from being generated.

language.js seems to be an abandonware whereas PEG.js which camxes.js is
based upon is an actively developed library.

The authors of PEG.js once were asked if " % "could be implemented in
PEG.js. The reply was that it's not clearly understandable how it can be
better than the already existing " / { ... }" in PEG.js. [
https://github.com/pegjs/pegjs/issues/145 ]

I doubt too whether we really need naughty OR. " / { ... }" is what xorxes
and I have been doing for the last weeks and the goal was exactly to
continue parsing the tree if something is omitted. This allowed e.g.
parsing
"mi djica lo nu lo plise" which in the official grammar was invalid.

" / " is a prioritized choice operator
" { ... } " are parser actions that send desired javascript actions to the
output and thus generate the syntax tree among other things.

E.g. I proposed adding " / COhE_elidible" where COhE_elidible returns a " {
... } " expression.

So instead of one error message we get numerous "autorestored" nodes
instead of just one error message "your parse failed".

So unless anyone explains why naughty OR is better than what has been done
I will continue to think that PEG.js is fine and more such " / {...} "
improvements are needed.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BPFK" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--001a11c3aa5856a7eb0513088f88
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr">There is a <a href=3D"http://tolmasky.github.io/language/"=
>language.js</a>=C2=A0PEG library that adds a new &quot; % &quot; operator =
(&quot;naughty OR&quot;) used only if the parse completely fails.<div>This =
&quot; % &quot; can be used to show all errors in the tree. Finding the fir=
st error doesn&#39;t stop the tree from being generated.</div><div><br></di=
v><div>language.js seems to be an abandonware whereas PEG.js which camxes.j=
s is based upon is an actively developed library.</div><div><br></div><div>=
The authors of PEG.js once were asked if &quot; % &quot;could be implemente=
d in PEG.js. The reply was that it&#39;s not clearly understandable how it =
can be better than the already existing &quot; / { ... }&quot; in PEG.js. [=
=C2=A0<a href=3D"https://github.com/pegjs/pegjs/issues/145">https://github.=
com/pegjs/pegjs/issues/145</a> ]</div><div><br></div><div>I doubt too wheth=
er we really need naughty OR. &quot; / { ... }&quot; is what xorxes and I h=
ave been doing for the last weeks and the goal was exactly to continue pars=
ing the tree if something is omitted. This allowed e.g. parsing=C2=A0</div>=
<div>&quot;mi djica lo nu lo plise&quot; which in the official grammar was =
invalid.</div><div><br></div><div>&quot; / &quot; is a prioritized choice o=
perator</div><div>&quot; { ... } &quot; are parser actions that send desire=
d javascript actions to the output and thus generate the syntax tree among =
other things.</div><div><br></div><div>E.g. I proposed adding &quot; / COhE=
_elidible&quot; where=C2=A0COhE_elidible returns a &quot; { ... } &quot; ex=
pression.</div><div><br></div><div>So instead of one error message we get n=
umerous &quot;autorestored&quot; nodes instead of just one error message &q=
uot;your parse failed&quot;.</div><div><br></div><div>So unless anyone expl=
ains why naughty OR is better than what has been done I will continue to th=
ink that PEG.js is fine and more such &quot; / {...} &quot; improvements ar=
e needed.</div></div>

<p></p>

-- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;BPFK&quot; group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to <a href=3D"mailto:bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com">bpfk-list=
+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com</a>.<br />
To post to this group, send email to <a href=3D"mailto:bpfk-list@googlegrou=
ps.com">bpfk-list@googlegroups.com</a>.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list">ht=
tp://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list</a>.<br />
For more options, visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.com/d/optout">http=
s://groups.google.com/d/optout</a>.<br />

--001a11c3aa5856a7eb0513088f88--