Prev: Good REST Client
Next: Unable to read after commit () with JPA
From: Roedy Green on 14 May 2010 00:48
On 14 May 2010 00:49:04 GMT, ram(a)zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram)
wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :

> I: So here is the grammar. You just need to read it and sign this
> confirmation that it really describes the language you want me
> to write the parser for, then I can go on and write the actual parser.
> customer: But I can't read EBNF!

Then you did what Ian Eason did back in circa 1968. He generated
large numbers of conforming random sentences.
--
Roedy Green Canadian Mind Products
http://mindprod.com

Beauty is our business.
~ Edsger Wybe Dijkstra (born: 1930-05-11 died: 2002-08-06 at age: 72)

Referring to computer science.
From: markspace on 14 May 2010 05:01
Stefan Ram wrote:

> I: So here is the grammar. You just need to read it and sign this
> confirmation that it really describes the language you want me
> to write the parser for, then I can go on and write the actual parser.
> customer: But I can't read EBNF!
>
> What then?
>


That's kinda a good question. What do you do when the customer can't
evaluate the product they are buying? I only see two choices

1. They're going to have to trust you when you tell them something is
correct.

2. They're going to have to hire a second technologist or business
analyst who can advise them on what is best for their company.

On a slightly more practical level, you might have to demonstrate, or
give assurances in writing, that the grammar you provide will parse
certain examples which they can review.
From: RedGrittyBrick on 14 May 2010 06:01
On 14/05/2010 01:49, Stefan Ram wrote:
> Arne Vajhøj<arne(a)vajhoej.dk> writes:
>> It is not possible to evaluate the complexity based on the
>> information given.
>
> customer: Could you write a parser for us?
> I: Ok, just send me the grammar.
> customer: The what?
> I: Some kind of EBNF or so.
> customer: Well, I can't write EBNF. Could you write the grammar, too?
> We'll send you some examples of the language.
> I: Ok.
> (time passes.)
> I: So here is the grammar. You just need to read it and sign this
> confirmation that it really describes the language you want me
> to write the parser for, then I can go on and write the actual parser.
> customer: But I can't read EBNF!
>
> What then?
>

Generate a railroad diagram from the EBNF and get them to sign that?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syntax_diagram

--
RGB
From: Martin Gregorie on 14 May 2010 07:11
On Fri, 14 May 2010 00:49:04 +0000, Stefan Ram wrote:

> Arne Vajhøj <arne(a)vajhoej.dk> writes:
>>It is not possible to evaluate the complexity based on the information
>>given.
>
> customer: Could you write a parser for us? I: Ok, just send me the
> grammar.
> customer: The what?
> I: Some kind of EBNF or so.
> customer: Well, I can't write EBNF. Could you write the grammar, too?
> We'll send you some examples of the language. I: Ok.
> (time passes.)
> I: So here is the grammar. You just need to read it and sign this
> confirmation that it really describes the language you want me to
> write the parser for, then I can go on and write the actual parser.
> customer: But I can't read EBNF!
>
> What then?

Write a few examples of realistic configurations that match your grammar,
preferably examples of:
- a really simple configuration
- what you expect a typical configuration would look like.
- the most complex configuration the client might want


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |
From: Lew on 14 May 2010 08:56
markspace wrote:
> That's kinda a good question. What do you do when the customer can't
> evaluate the product they are buying? I only see two choices
>
> 1. They're going to have to trust you when you tell them something is
> correct.
>
> 2. They're going to have to hire a second technologist or business
> analyst who can advise them on what is best for their company.
>
> On a slightly more practical level, you might have to demonstrate, or
> give assurances in writing, that the grammar you provide will parse
> certain examples which they can review.

Clearly you are defining the conditions of satisfaction incorrectly in this case.

The client should not sign off on the implementation, e.g., the parsing
grammar. The client should sign off on the behavior, within the universe of
discourse of their business, e.g., that the business transaction confers the
proper information/cash/results.

I don't care whether you take a plane, train, or automobile as long as you're
in Albequerque for the meeting on time and under budget.

--
Lew
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: Good REST Client
Next: Unable to read after commit () with JPA