From rob@twcny.rr.com Wed Mar 13 22:13:13 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: rob@twcny.rr.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: unknown); 14 Mar 2002 06:13:13 -0000 Received: (qmail 3362 invoked from network); 14 Mar 2002 06:13:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (216.115.97.172) by m11.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 14 Mar 2002 06:13:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailout5.nyroc.rr.com) (24.92.226.122) by mta2.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 14 Mar 2002 06:13:12 -0000 Received: from mail1.twcny.rr.com (mail1-1 [24.92.226.139]) by mailout5.nyroc.rr.com (8.11.6/Road Runner 1.12) with ESMTP id g2E6DBM18585 for ; Thu, 14 Mar 2002 01:13:11 -0500 (EST) Received: from riff ([24.92.246.4]) by mail1.twcny.rr.com (Post.Office MTA v3.5.3 release 223 ID# 0-59787U250000L250000S0V35) with ESMTP id com for ; Thu, 14 Mar 2002 01:13:10 -0500 Received: from rob by riff with local (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 16lOUB-0000ij-00 for ; Thu, 14 Mar 2002 01:13:11 -0500 Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 01:13:11 -0500 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] lojban application in wearable computing Message-ID: <20020314061311.GC2700@twcny.rr.com> References: <20020313180412.GJ29405@digitalkingdom.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.24i X-Is-It-Not-Nifty: www.sluggy.com From: Rob Speer Reply-To: rob@twcny.rr.com X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=2572649 X-Yahoo-Profile: squeekybobo On Wed, Mar 13, 2002 at 06:38:07PM -0800, Ted Reed wrote: > > Exactly. lojban doesn't use bracketing to define precedence, in > > general. It has a series of sentences which are syntactically > > unrelated. > > > > -Robin > > But the presence of elidable terminators does strike a resemblance to using > brackets for things that are more than one word. (Or parenthesis in the case > of scheme.) The presence of elidable terminators strikes a resemblance to parentheses as they are used in _any_ language. The structure of Lisp/Scheme doesn't seem to line up with the structure of Lojban, though, except possibly in the predicates - and there you'd have to munge the grammar around a lot. For example, though this is an issue with many programming models, few Lisp functions have a "subject", while basically all Lojban bridi do, so what do you do with the x1 places? This gives me the impression that perhaps something like Smalltalk with different syntax would be a good model, because if everything is object-oriented, you can command the objects themselves to do stuff. {doi xy ko zenba fi li pa}. I wish I knew something about what Prolog was. -- la rab.spir noi pilno la paitan