[antlr-interest] ITLS (was: Translators Should Use Tree Grammars)
John D. Mitchell
johnm-antlr at non.net
Sun Nov 21 10:47:14 PST 2004
>>>>> "Oliver" == Oliver Zeigermann <oliver.zeigermann at gmail.com> writes:
>>>>>> <johnm-antlr at non.net> wrote:
[...]
>> Well, I don't have time to get into all of the silliness (and other
>> folks have already done a fair job at it :-) so here's a more general
>> facet that, alas, is missed completely in your diatribe...
> Saying something is silly without explaining what is not very
> convincing...
I apologize for being too busy with paying work to spend extra time on
this. As my parenthetical remark noted, other folks (e.g. Loring, Michael,
and Ter) have commented on a number of issues in Andy's arguments.
>> * Any non-trivial program written in a general purpose programming
>> language contains ad-hoc, bug-ridden, inarticulate implementations of
>> multiple, informally-specified, incomplete languages.
> What are you referring to here: the equivalence of phrase structure
> grammars and a turing machine? If so, program and grammar are just two
> ways to look at a problem with neither of them having precedence over the
> other. So, your argument does not seem to be too convincing to me.
(A) Look up Greenspun's Tenth Rule.
(B) Never explain a joke.
(C) Not getting the joke, alas, would seem to indicate that you didn't
understand the point of rest of my post and well, I don't see anything that
I can do about that at this point.
Take care,
John
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/antlr-interest/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
antlr-interest-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
More information about the antlr-interest
mailing list