[lojban] Re: Annotated PEG grammar

["Chris Capel" <pdf23ds@gmail.com>]

On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 14:12, Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>  gek-sentence <- gek subsentence gik subsentence tail-terms / tag? KE free* gek-sentence KEhE? free* / NA free* gek-sentence
>
>>> This production refers to the already-defined production subsentence above. The options handle KE and NA prefixes.
>
> Perhaps point out why KE is used here at all. It's not needed to do
> any grouping, since gek already handles that by itself. I think the
> only reason is to separate "tag" from a possibe gek of form "tag GI"
> since otherwise "tag tag" could collapse into a single tag.

I believe the other examples is when you have, e.g., four subsentences
all connected with geks and you want to group the middle two somehow.

>>> sumti-4 <- sumti-5 / gek sumti gik sumti-4
>>>
>>>This references itself instead of 'sumti' so that joik-eks get associated with the whole gek-gik phrase instead of just the sumti after the gik.
>
> A very unfortunate and confusing choice.  gek .. gik ... should allow
> the same things for each connectand.

Perhaps. I've taken that bit out of the commentary, preferring a more
elaborate treatment of precedence and reference to other members of a
series at some other place in the document. Do you think that
particular comment is noteworthy?

Chris Capel
-- 
"What is it like to be a bat? What is it like to bat a bee? What is it
like to be a bee being batted? What is it like to be a batted bee?"
-- The Mind's I (Hofstadter, Dennet)


To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.