Re: [lojban] Re: other parsable languages

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

On Fri, Sep 30, 2005 at 12:52:26PM -0700, Ryan Keppel wrote:
> 
> 
> ------ Original Message ------
> Received: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 11:32:30 AM PDT
> From: Matt Arnold <matt.mattarn@gmail.com>
> To: lojban-list@lojban.org
> Subject: [lojban] other parsable languages
> 
> > I know that Lojban is hailed as "parsable" by a computer, but
> > does this mean that it is merely parsed more easily? Or that no
> > other language has a complete YACC grammar? Can someone offer a
> > little more detail to someone who is not a specialist?
> 
> YACC is just a (pretentiously named) parser. I would be more
> interested if any other language has a complete EBNF grammar,
> without regard to a particular tool.

BNF == YACC for all formalizable purposes, as long as your YACC
doesn't use raw code to make parsing decisions.

If reading "BNF" for everytime I said "YACC" helps, feel free; the
truth value of my statements doesn't change, I don't think.

-Robin

-- 
http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ *** http://www.lojban.org/
Reason #237 To Learn Lojban: "Homonyms: Their Grate!"
Proud Supporter of the Singularity Institute - http://singinst.org/