The increasing complexity of the rules does not persuade.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
|\/| Randy A MacDonald             | you can't pay for it,
|/\| [EMAIL PROTECTED]            |       even if you want to.
BSc(Math) UNBF'83 Sapere Aude      | APL: If you can say it, it's done..
Natural Born APL'er                | Demo website: http://142.166.105.166/
----------------------------------------------------(INTP)----{ gnat }-

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "p j" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Programming forum" <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 11:43 AM
Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] Radical default parenthesising method/idea


> for any sentence fragment a, and noun b
> 'a* b' would be equivalent to 'a * b' and 'a*b' and
> equivalent to the existing parsing rules.
> 
> No invalid syntax cases are created by the proposed
> space conventions.  But I screwed up in the proposal.
> 
> There's a mistake in my original 2 simple rules. 
> Needs 3 rules instead.  Hopefully 
> 1. replace " " to right of noun with ")"
> 2. replace pattern noun-dyad-space with no space
> between left noun and dyad with noun)dyad
> 3. replace " " to left of noun with closing "("
> Ommitted implied rules:
> - Left edge is equivalent to a space
> - bracketing conjunctions and adverbs according to J
> rules still takes precedence over verbs.
> 
> So, Going back to nouns a,b,c:
> ' c+a* b ' in a sentence fragment that could have more
> to the left and right parses according to the 3 simple
> rules as (c+a)* b... equivalent to the wordier (c+a)*
> (b).  ' c+a *b ' would also parse to the same
> expression... but with wordier version: ' ((c+a)*b) '
> ' c+a * b ' is also the same expression.  Wordy
> version: ' (c+a) * (b) '
> 
> The equivalent human reading/writing rules are
> "evaluate what is grouped together (and separated by
> spaces) according to language parsing rules before
> applying joining dyadic verbs."
> 
> Another way of describing the algorithm (but less
> machine friendly) is for any dyad, its left argument
> is determined by putting closing brackets around the
> first noun that is left bounded by a space, and its
> right argument bounded by the noun is right bounded by
> a space.  
> 
> Regarding a preprocessor, could it still be practical
> for private use, even if no one else understood the
> benefits of the syntax, and was ruled out of being
> incorporated into the language?
> 
> --- Alexander Schmolck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > it's a reasonable idea, but maybe a bit tricky to
> > get right. One problem is
> > that it doesn't scale well at all (distingusihing
> > between more than ``a*b``
> > and ``a * b`` is down the road to madness, IMO; but
> > then what do you do about
> > assymetrical ws as in ``a* b`` -- outlaw it?).
> > 
> 
> > Having said that, why don't you try to implement a
> > preprocessor for J or
> > another language of your choice, and see how well it
> > works in practice?
> 
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
> http://mail.yahoo.com 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

Reply via email to