Hey, On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 9:57 PM, Matthew Wilson <diakop...@gmail.com> wrote: > I hadn't seen this paper/repo referenced on this list or any of the > links from langsec.org, so I thought it might be helpful to point out. > I realize the answer to my question is generally agreed upon by the > list participants... > > On second thought, it occurs to me that perhaps you didn't see the > link I included (since you didn't quote it) to the parsing-parses > Github repo of JasonGross?
I did see it; thanks for sharing : ) The reason I asked was that, the way I see it, LangSec's core idea is not only to build correct parsers, but to reason if the language the parser parses is what we really need to deal with -- e.g., do we really need a CFL in a given context or would a RL suffice? Cheers, G. Salazar _______________________________________________ langsec-discuss mailing list langsec-discuss@mail.langsec.org https://mail.langsec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/langsec-discuss
