Re: [bpfk] Can we drop the fore tanru cmavo?

[Robin Lee Powell <rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org>]

On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 01:25:46PM -0500, John Cowan wrote:
> Robin Lee Powell scripsit:
> 
> > i.e., can PEG support having one set of fore logical connectives
> > only, or is the issue deeper than lookahead?
> 
> In principle it is only lookahead, but I'd be reluctant to mess
> with this because of human limitations -- PEG grammars can look
> ahead arbitrarily far, but humans cannot.  When you hear GA after
> a selbri, you know that the selbri is complete; when you hear
> GUhA, you know there is more selbri to come.  I think that's a
> valuable property that shouldn't be discarded lightly.
> 
> This is why I have been reluctant to use the PEG grammar as a
> basis for grammar changes.  The YACC grammar is over-constraining
> and makes some elidable terminators necessary (the notorious le
> broda ku joi le brodo) that wouldn't actually confuse anyone.  But
> OTOH it doesn't permit things to be grammatical that no human
> could decipher.  We need a happy medium.

I completely agree.

-Robin

-- 
http://singinst.org/ :  Our last, best hope for a fantastic future.
.i ko na cpedu lo nu stidi vau loi jbopre .i danfu lu na go'i li'u .e
lu go'i li'u .i ji'a go'i lu na'e go'i li'u .e lu go'i na'i li'u .e
lu no'e go'i li'u .e lu to'e go'i li'u .e lu lo mamta be do cu sofybakni li'u

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BPFK" group.
To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list?hl=en.