From phma@webjockey.net Sun Jan 26 08:31:01 2003
Return-Path: <phma@ixazon.dynip.com>
X-Sender: phma@ixazon.dynip.com
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_0); 26 Jan 2003 16:31:01 -0000
Received: (qmail 19298 invoked from network); 26 Jan 2003 16:31:00 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216)
  by m15.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 26 Jan 2003 16:31:00 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO blackcat.ixazon.lan) (208.150.110.21)
  by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 26 Jan 2003 16:31:00 -0000
Received: by blackcat.ixazon.lan (Postfix, from userid 1001)
  id A003AA81C; Sun, 26 Jan 2003 16:30:59 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: dis
To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: valfendi algorithm
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 11:30:59 -0500
User-Agent: KMail/1.5
References: <5.2.0.9.0.20030124202537.03d9ab60@pop.east.cox.net> <5.2.0.9.0.20030126015227.03262740@pop.east.cox.net>
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20030126015227.03262740@pop.east.cox.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200301261130.59398.phma@webjockey.net>
From: Pierre Abbat <phma@webjockey.net>
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=92712300

Would it be better to put the check for these invalid cmene forms in the 
validation algorithm, which is the next part I'll write, rather than the 
word-breaking algorithm? The effect would be that e.g. 
/mibEnjilebrablOlailalaus/ would be lexed as {mi benji le brablolai la laus} 
and then the validator would call {laus} invalid; currently it lexes it as 
{mi benji le brablolai la la us} and the lexer calls {us} invalid.

phma