The title says it all; the following won't parse:
{.i broda .ija'ebo brode .iseri'abobo brodi}
Semantically, it should parse meaning that {.i brode .iseri'abo brodi} is the right-hand operand of {.ija'ebo}.
On a related note, even-higher-precedence grouping with bo is not possible for ijeks; the following won't parse:
.i (broda .ijebo (brode .ijebo ((brodi .ijebobo brodo) .ijebo brodu)))
Parentheses show intended parse.
Furthermore, multiple {bo} are not allowed in tanru groupings:
{.i (broda bo ((brode bo bo brodi) bo brodo))}
It just seems like multiple {bo} is illegal across the board. Bug or feature? Could this even be implemented? If it can, should we?
.i mi'e la tsani mu'o
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.