From rob@twcny.rr.com Mon Aug 27 13:49:24 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: rob@telenet.net X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_2); 27 Aug 2001 20:49:24 -0000 Received: (qmail 9603 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 20:39:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 27 Aug 2001 20:39:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO telenet.net) (204.97.152.225) by mta3 with SMTP; 27 Aug 2001 20:39:06 -0000 Received: from riff (ip-209-23-14-94.modem.logical.net [209.23.14.94]) by telenet.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA03012 for ; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 16:39:04 -0400 Received: from rob by riff with local (Exim 3.22 #1 (Debian)) id 15bT9h-0000GZ-00 for ; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 16:38:45 -0400 Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2001 16:38:44 -0400 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] LALR1 question Message-ID: <20010827163844.A919@twcny.rr.com> Reply-To: rob@twcny.rr.com References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.18i X-Is-It-Not-Nifty: www.sluggy.com Sender: Rob Speer From: Rob Speer On Mon, Aug 27, 2001 at 11:17:55AM -0600, Jay Kominek wrote: > Hrm. A parser with back tracking or more look ahead (or basically any > parser which can parse a larger class of languages) could take the same > YACC grammar and be able to parse "le broda joi le brode" correctly... I > think... So, what is the advantage to having Lojban interpreted by a parser which can't backtrack or look ahead more than one word? -- Rob Speer