[Attempto] APE Webclient parsing error

[Kenneth Jones]

I appreciate you taking the time to respond to my message.  Keeping the DRS
of the grammar rules as simple as possible will definitely make my work
easier.  I will focus on this.  The tip about using the phrase "there is a
n:conditions-definition C" instead of "C is a n:conditions-definition" is
something I will also keep in mind.

Using a sentence-external marker and using "is" instead of "must be" makes a
lot of sense.  I believe in keeping things as simple as possible (the KISS
principle).  As you say, this approach may also make things simpler and more
obvious for the reader.  In the beginning I can simply keep the different
kinds of statements in different files, each with a file extension that
indicates how it should be interpreted.  This is great advice.  At a later
time, if I feel it might be useful, I can experiment with trying to
integrate the different sentence types into a single coherent multi-paradigm
language with modules that contain mixed sentence types.

Any more tips/guidance you can think of will be greatly appreciated.

-- Ken

On Sat, Jan 2, 2010 at 10:46 AM, Norbert E. Fuchs <fuchs at ifi.uzh.ch> wrote:

>
> On 2 Jan 2010, at 04:40, Kenneth Jones wrote:
>
> > ...
> >
> > I guess it's obvious that I'm am trying to write a DRS parser in ACE.  I
> then want to add a back end that generates code (initially Java code).
>
> I thought so and this guided me when I rephrased your sentence.
>
> May I suggest that when writing the DRS parser you keep in mind how to
> simply get from the DRS derived from your grammar rules to the Java code.
> The more verbose your grammar rules are – for instance writing "C is a
> n:conditions-definition" instead of  "there is a n:conditions-definition C"
> – the more work you have to do to get from the DRS to the Java code.
>
> > The reason for using "must be" instead of "is a" near the end of the
> sentence is that I am trying to generate code from specifications that are
> written as statements of necessity rather than assertions or statements of
> facts.  In the end I want to be able to create a multi-paradigm language
> that uses statements of necessity to express requirements that are
> translated to imperative code, assertions to express business rules,
> constraints, pre-conditions, post-conditions, and tests in a declarative
> manner, and facts to express data.
>
> Do I understand you correctly that you indicate the interpretation of your
> ACE sentences as code, or rule, or ...  by the verb form, i.e. by a
> sentence-internal marker? Wouldn't some sentence-external marker – for
> instance grouping your sentences according to their target representations –
>  be simpler and more obvious for the reader? Furthermore, using "is" instead
> of "must be" again simplifies the transformation DRS -> Java.
>
> Regards.
>
>   --- nef
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ifi.uzh.ch/pipermail/attempto/attachments/20100102/0e38e77c/attachment.html>