BPFK Section: Formal Grammar

From Lojban
Revision as of 08:09, 30 June 2014 by Conversion script (talk) (Conversion script moved page BPFK Section: Formal Grammar to bPFK Section: Formal Grammar: Converting page titles to lowercase)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

For non-BPFK discussion of the formal grammar, see Grammar.

This section describes a proposed update to the Formal Grammar, defining the grammar in PEG rather than YACC. This section requires cleanup and a shepherd.

Proposed grammar changes

Issues

  • CLL 9.9, example 9.8: mi bai ke ge klama le zarci gi cadzu le bisli. Camxes' PEG sees this like mi bai ku ke ge klama le zarci gi cadzu le bisli. There doesn't appear to be a way to fill the tag in the gek-sentence production. Jbofihe and the official parser both get this right. Also relevant is example 18.15 from CLL 14.18: mi pu ge klama le zarci gi tervecnu lo cidja. Jbofihe and the official parser both fail on this. Camxes sees it as mi pu ku ge klama le zarci gi tervecnu lo cidja. Is this what is intended?
    • Good catch. I think what camxes does is the Right Thing™, and that the unreachable tag should just be eliminated from the grammar. mi'e xorxes
  • an we drop lerfu+namcu strings? At least, can we do that if we drop lots of mekso crap too? See that thread and the relevant bits of zasni gerna cenba vreji.
  • The grammar has a difference between “operand” and “number” that probably isn't intentional; because of this, constructs like “mo'e zo'e” cannot be used where other numbers are allowed.