Prev: solutions book
Next: "a new cosmology"
From: Milind Bandekar (Milz) on 23 Jul 2010 09:43
A New Kind of Grammars: A new kind of generative grammars that can
produce the empty language is designed in this book.

http://amzn.com/1452828687

An unrepresented mongrel of Computer Science, the null or invalid
string gets a new representative symbol in this book.
From: Barb Knox on 23 Jul 2010 17:18
In article
<b57d74ef-7711-4a77-9044-31d3584f1437(a)5g2000yqz.googlegroups.com>,
"Milind Bandekar (Milz)" <milzex(a)gmail.com> wrote:

> A New Kind of Grammars: A new kind of generative grammars that can
> produce the empty language is designed in this book.

<grammar-pedantry>
It should be "a new kind of generative grammar", no "s".
</grammar-pedantry>


> http://amzn.com/1452828687
>
> An unrepresented mongrel of Computer Science, the null or invalid
> string gets a new representative symbol in this book.

I guess you've never seen a lambda in that context, which is commonly
used for the null string.

And most sensible systems make a distinction between the null string
(which may be valid) and an invalid string.

Your attempt to tout this book has had the opposite effect on me.


--
---------------------------
| BBB b \ Barbara at LivingHistory stop co stop uk
| B B aa rrr b |
| BBB a a r bbb | Quidquid latine dictum sit,
| B B a a r b b | altum videtur.
| BBB aa a r bbb |
-----------------------------
From: Ben Bacarisse on 23 Jul 2010 22:13
Barb Knox <see(a)sig.below> writes:

> In article
> <b57d74ef-7711-4a77-9044-31d3584f1437(a)5g2000yqz.googlegroups.com>,
> "Milind Bandekar (Milz)" <milzex(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> A New Kind of Grammars: A new kind of generative grammars that can
>> produce the empty language is designed in this book.
>
> <grammar-pedantry>
> It should be "a new kind of generative grammar", no "s".
> </grammar-pedantry>

Did you see that's actually the name of the book? I though it would
turn out to be a transcription error, but no.

<snip>
> Your attempt to tout this book has had the opposite effect on me.

The numbering of the front matter did it for me. If one is going to be
cute and use negative chapter numbers, the subsections should be
numbered the right way (i.e. -1.3, -1.2, -1.1, 0, 0.1, ...). A silly
matter but I can be bothered by much less.

To be serious for a moment. The book claims as its starting point the
"problem" that standard Chomsky grammars can't describe the language
with no strings. Is this not trivially false? A grammar, G, whose set
of production rules is empty has L(G) = {}, no?

--
Ben.
 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: solutions book
Next: "a new cosmology"