Pantagruel: An Unambiguous, Undefined Program Specification Language
1–10 of 11 posts
Re: Pantagruel: An Unambiguous, Undefined Program Specification Language
#2This involves a whole lot less ass-wiping[1] than I was expecting it to.
1: https://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/r/rabelais/francois/r11g/book...
Re: Pantagruel: An Unambiguous, Undefined Program Specification Language
#3This involves a whole lot less ass-wiping[1] than I was expecting it to. 1: https://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/r/rabelais/francois/r11g/book...
What did I just read? O.o
Re: Pantagruel: An Unambiguous, Undefined Program Specification Language
#4Re: Pantagruel: An Unambiguous, Undefined Program Specification Language
#5I'm curious how the parsing must work because I can't unambiguously see how this line is parsed
fib x ← fib x − 1 + fib x − 2
Why is that parsed to behave correctly like
fib x ← fib (x − 1) + fib (x − 2)
And not,
fib x ← fib( x − 1 + fib ( x − 2 ))
Or even this, though it wouldn't produce a sane program
fib x ← fib ( x ) − 1 + fib ( x ) − 2
Re: Pantagruel: An Unambiguous, Undefined Program Specification Language
#6Finally someone who writes a proper and honest "Who would be interested in this?". Thanks.
Re: Pantagruel: An Unambiguous, Undefined Program Specification Language
#7I'm curious how the parsing must work because I can't unambiguously see how this line is parsed fib x ← fib x − 1 + fib x − 2 Why is that parsed to behave correctly like fib x ← fib (x − 1) + fib (x − 2) And not, fib x ← fib( x − 1 + fib ( x − 2 )) Or even this, though it wouldn't produce a sane program fib x ← fib ( x ) − 1 + fib ( x ) − 2
I think the idea is that something is ambiguous if it has more than one meaning. This language avoids the problem by having no meaning. It may be a very dry joke. I'm not sure.
Re: Pantagruel: An Unambiguous, Undefined Program Specification Language
#8I'm curious how the parsing must work because I can't unambiguously see how this line is parsed fib x ← fib x − 1 + fib x − 2 Why is that parsed to behave correctly like fib x ← fib (x − 1) + fib (x − 2) And not, fib x ← fib( x − 1 + fib ( x − 2 )) Or even this, though it wouldn't produce a sane program fib x ← fib ( x ) − 1 + fib ( x ) − 2
The parser as described _only_ cares about identifiers; it has no concept of operator precedence, which is not required for its purpose.
Re: Pantagruel: An Unambiguous, Undefined Program Specification Language
#9I’m interested.
And: I’m still attempting to understand copatterns, but this is quite reminescent of copatterns. That’s all I have.
Re: Pantagruel: An Unambiguous, Undefined Program Specification Language
#10This involves a whole lot less ass-wiping[1] than I was expecting it to. 1: https://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/r/rabelais/francois/r11g/book...
Come on