WikiDiscuss

Posted by rlpowell on Tue 09 of Nov, 2004 02:05 GMT posts: 14214

On Sun, Nov 07, 2004 at 10:54:24PM -0500, Pierre Abbat wrote:
> On Sunday 07 November 2004 22:27, Robin Lee Powell wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 07, 2004 at 10:20:30PM -0500, Pierre Abbat wrote:
> > > On Sunday 07 November 2004 22:11, Robin Lee Powell wrote:
> > > > On Sun, Nov 07, 2004 at 04:22:08PM -0500, Pierre Abbat
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > ti ba'e skargolu la karsarli sa za'e mantanko la marcuigli
> > > >
> > > > Umm, and your point would be?
> > >
> > > {sa za'e} appears to be an error, rather than erasing back to
> > > {ba'e}, since the rule makes it invisible.
> >
> > Yes, but the rule operates left-to-right.
>
> Yes. {ba'e} is on the left, so it has already been made invisible
> by the rule by the time the preprocessor gets to {sa}, so {sa} has
> no BAhE to erase back to. If {za'e} were invisible, {sa} would
> erase back to the previous brivla, which is {karsarli}.

• OOOH*.

Misunderstood, sorry.

Yes, that seems to be a bit of a problem.

-Robin