On 02/22/11 10:57 PM, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
On 02/22/11 03:49 PM, rjf wrote:
A parser for the maxima language is not only easier to write,
it is available in source form. It is also based on a well known
technique which is also used by Reduce. The real difficulty is
to implement a Mathematica language parser, since the language
fails to fit the standard expectations for computer languages.
I know you said that, but I've herd different from another source. See
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.compilers/msg/8c4e6ccad3c40599
The person there, who is the CTO of a company producing this
http://www.semanticdesigns.com/Products/DMS/DMSToolkit.html
which has an option for a Mathematica parser (I assume the Mathematica
parser costs extra too).
He says Mathematica is not a particularly difficult language to parse,
and a GLR parser is a bit over the top.
Here you can see a Mathematica parser is listed for the DMS toolkit
http://www.semanticdesigns.com/Products/FrontEnds/index.html?Home=DMSDomains
So I don't know what to believe Richard. You are saying the Mathematica language
can't be parsed with a conventional parser, so had to hand-write the parser for
MockMMA, yet someone from a commercial company selling this DMS toolkit claims
the language is not particularly difficult to parse, and have a front end for
their toolkit (a GLR parser) able to parse Mathematica.
Clearly Wolfram|Alpha is a bit more clever, as it parsers written English and
tries (sometimes not very successfully) to work with that.
--
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
Dave
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URL: http://www.sagemath.org
