WikiDiscuss

---

> Like I say, I believe that partitioning, validation and characterization are
> probably simpler considered separately than together. It takes a genius of
> Jorge's caliber to write or understand a parser that does all three
> simultaneously.

Thank you for the compliment, but in fact what I tried to do is
to separate them as much as I could.

> I strongly suspect that if separate grammars were used to
> solve pieces of the whole problem, each would be simple enough that many,
> many more people would be able to understand them.

The cmene, gismu and cmavo rules are very easy to understand, I would say.

The lujvo rule is somewhat complicated by the stress rules. I plan
to do a separate parallel grammar that does not handle capital
letters when this one is done, which I believe is much easier to
read. Other than that, the lujvo section is long but straightforward.

fu'ivla is probably the trickiest part to figure out.

> Ideally, they would be
> simple enough that it would be feasible to see whether the grammar(s) do
> what the prose description says.

Indeed, that's the goal. That's one reason for using terms
like "slinkuhi" and "tosmabru" for rule names for example, because
they perform the slinkuhi and tosmabru tests respectively.

mu'o mi'e xorxes

__
Do you Yahoo!?
The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free!
http://my.yahoo.com