This partial copy from (my) part 2 might provide enough insight: <<--- Part Two ---
As you look over the list of messages, you realize your matching rules aren't quite right. To fix them, completely replace rules 8: 42 and 11: 42 31 with the following: 8: 42 | 42 8 11: 42 31 | 42 11 31 This small change has a big impact: now, the rules do contain loops, and the list of messages they could hypothetically match is infinite. You'll need to determine how these changes affect which messages are valid...... >> So these two rules become self referential. I’ve no Idea what David’s talking about! Cheers, M Sent from my iPad > On 29 Dec 2020, at 02:59, Raul Miller <[email protected]> wrote: > > Seems to me that that problem consists of itemizing the possibilities > for each rule. Or does part 2 get into an example which exceeds a > threshold in the vicinity of a billion possibilities? (I must admit > that I haven't indulged, this year.) > > Thanks, > > > -- > Raul > >> On Mon, Dec 28, 2020 at 8:09 PM David Lambert <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> bison with %glr-parser turned out to be the best attack. Nearly a direct >> translation. >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
