Re: history of generative grammars

Helmut Richter wrote:
- Is it true that neither in linguistics nor in computer science any
type of grammar more general than context-free has ever played a
practical role?

In automata theory, the hardware state under free (but legal) input
is taken as a language, and you ask whether something is in the language,
usually something undesireable. (If so, you have to redesign it.)

It's not context-free. Various application programs have various
ways to answer the question in cases that are not hopelessly unfriendly,
called formal verification.

--
Ron Hardin
rhhardin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On the internet, nobody knows you're a jerk.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Proof of inherent ambiguity?
    ... > language AND the proof that that language is inherently ambiguous? ... context-free and inherently ambiguous. ... Introduction to Automata Theory. ... Brian ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: Proof of inherent ambiguity?
    ... > language AND the proof that that language is inherently ambiguous? ... context-free and inherently ambiguous. ... Introduction to Automata Theory. ... Brian ...
    (comp.theory)
  • Re: Is Python context-sensitive?
    ... I've recently participated in a discussion of whether Python programming ... language is context-sensitive or context-free. ... contains just indentation and an "a" symbol. ...
    (comp.theory)
  • Re: Is Python context-sensitive?
    ... context-free or do we have to take lexer into consideration as well? ... but solely about whether the syntax of the language can ... using a FSA with a stack? ... apply to programming languages used in practise. ...
    (comp.theory)
  • Re: Proof of inherent ambiguity?
    ... > in the context-free language defined by that grammar has more than one ... > parse tree with that grammar. ... I wonder how one can prove inherent ambiguity. ...
    (comp.theory)