|
English grammar is ridiculously simple, with no more than about 130 rules, which could be learned to perfection in a couple of hours.
Style rules, distinctions of the various ways to phrase things, and idioms, however...
How many centuries can you pencil in to work on it?
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Right. And if just programmers would learn to write correct programs adhering to all rules, compilers could be ridiculously simple.
But I assume that you meant to be sarcastic.
|
|
|
|
|
Member 7989122 wrote: But I assume that you meant to be sarcastic.
No, English grammar is ridiculously simple, with about 130 rules.
As I said, I believe quite clearly, it's the ridiculous number of non-rules that is the problem -- "non-rules" being idiomatic speech, old sayings/proverbs/etc, and ridiculous "rules" of style that hundreds of people have documented as being That-Which-Must-Be-Obeyed, but which are no more than personal preferences.
Using a computer language well is a piece of piss, by comparison, and the readership is computers, which don't come in a multitude of flavours and levels of understanding -- case in point my having to repeat my perfectly clear statements here.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Lots of grammar exceptions, and vocabulary is the real killer.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
LALR is not hard at all. The difference between SLR and LALR is that in LALR the context is taken into account in computing the lookahead. Couple of months ago I looked into your code and it seemed to me that you computed SLR rather than LALR.
|
|
|
|
|
I know the difference.
And I disagree that it's not difficult. Were it I could make the comments make sense. =)
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
According to the person whose website instructed me it's lalr by way of SLR
You compute the SLR itemsets and such then you create an extended grammar out of it and use that to resolve additional look ahead
At least that's what I think i understand of it.
The reason i can (i think?) verify that it's lalr is it generates exactly the same tables as Gold Parser, even for complicated stuff like Javascript grammars - either that or i got lucky.
Oh I have a grammar now that is Lalr(1) but not SLR(1). I should probably try it now that i have it.
Real programmers use butterflies
modified 15-Feb-20 15:17pm.
|
|
|
|
|
honey the codewitch wrote: I'm on my way to being able to create parser generators that can parse natural language
I'd love to see an article on this subject! When I was studying for my MS(CS) degree in the early 80s, I had the good fortune of sitting in a lecture by Naomi Sager @ NYU who worked in the area of natural language parsing. Attendees of the lecture received a copy of her recent book on the grammar of English. I still have it and will have to dig it out to relive the joys of NLP. 
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
cool!. And yeah if i ever finish it. I'll be honest i'm punching outside my weight class with this project
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
Natural language parsing has come a long way since the text commands in this game[^], which busied out our PDP-10 for a while when I was in third-year CS.
|
|
|
|
|
But can it run DOOM?
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
What's DOOM?
I had to look it up. I'll take the original ADVENT, thanks.
I think there's a PDP-10 emulator available online somewhere. When parsing eventually fills you with ennui, porting DOOM would make for quite the article!
|
|
|
|
|
There's a fad of porting doom to smart-appliance and peripheral devices like printers. Also graphing calculators.
"But can it run doom?" is almost an internetism at this point.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
A first-person shooter game with hi-res graphics?! 
|
|
|
|
|
Hi-res on PC at the time meant 320x200 8-bit color
On other devices obj they were different
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
I didn't know which version of DOOM was being ported. But still!
|
|
|
|
|
I'm envisioning DOOM running across a 19.2K RS-232 interface to a VT220 terminal or suitable emulation  .
I'm sure there's someone out there who's done a text-mode version of DOOM.
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
Contemporaneous with ADVENT on the PDP-10 was a Star Trek game, written by a classmate, for which the interface was a DecWriter (dot-matrix printer/terminal) on which a map would be displayed.
|
|
|
|
|
I played an IBM 370 version of the Colossal Cave Adventure, somewhere around 1981 or so. The various Star Trek text-mode games I played were all MS-DOS BASIC games.
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: I played an IBM 370 version of the Colossal Cave Adventure, somewhere around 1981 or so.
Time to relive your youth, Mr Wheeler!
A hollow voice says, "PLUGH".
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
Now that brings back memories! Clickety
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
When my hubby and I raid the stores for half priced valentines day chocolate.
It's not really about the money, but about the hunt.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
honey the codewitch wrote: It's not really about the money, but about the hunt.
If it is at half the price, you get twice as much chocolate for the amount of money you'd want to spend on it. It's about the chocolate; if it were about money you'd be saving or investing it.
I do the same after Christmas, and know a few chocoholics who look forward to the easter-bunny's departure.
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
I can't argue with that.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
I don't care for most chocolate that's mixed with other things, mint or almonds being about the only exceptions, so that rules out a lot of "holiday" chocolate.
Walmart (at least in Canada) has 85% chocolate from Switzerland with a generic label that says something like "Our Finest Chocolate". It's only C$2 for 100g (~US$1.50 for 3.5 oz), actually has enough sweetness to be quite yummy, and no what my wife calls "toxins". 
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
