Re: A tricky grammar

Norm Tovey-Walsh writes:

>> Wow.  That seems worth exploring.  It was with some trepidation that I
>> submitted this to Aparecium, but in a couple of seconds it came back
>> with:
>
> It was not difficult to fix. CoffeeGrinder 0.10.1 works published last
> night works.

Chapeau!

> I think, but have not invested much effort to determine, that this is
> the first infinitely ambiguous grammar I’ve tried to parse where the
> loop involved more than one node in the graph. All (?) of the other
> examples are just things like:
>
>   X: X, 'x'; 'x' .
>
> where the loop is “self referential”.

In wisps-001-020, sample grammars 5 and 6 both have two-symbol loops.  I
think NineML passed those tests, but perhaps you have touched the code
since then.  And until I get around to moving the wisps tests into the
ixml/tests directory, I suspect they won't be part of your routine
testing.  It's on my list (but fixing test failures in Aparecium is
ahead of it on the list).

Michael


-- 
C. M. Sperberg-McQueen
Black Mesa Technologies LLC
http://blackmesatech.com

Received on Friday, 18 March 2022 15:15:46 UTC