Search Results

Search found 458 results on 19 pages for 'grammar'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 2/19 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Good grammar for date data type for recursive descent parser LL(1)

    - by Totophil
    I'm building a custom expression parser and evaluator for production enviroment to provide a limited DSL to the users. The parser itself as the DSL, need to be simple. The parser is going to be built in an exotic language that doesn't support dynamic expression parsing nor has any parser generator tools available. My decision is to go for recursive descent approach with LL(1) grammar, so that even programmers with no previous experience in evaluating expression could quickly learn how the code works. It has to handle mixed expressions made up of several data types: decimals, percentages, strings and dates. And dates in the format of dd/mm/yyyy are easy to confuse with a string of devision ops. Is where a good solution to this problem? My own solution that is aimed at keeping the parser simple involves prefixing dates with a special symbol, let's say apostrophe: <date> ::= <apostr><digit><digit>/<digit><digit>/<digit><digit><digit><digit> <apostr> ::= ' <digit> ::= '0'..'9'

    Read the article

  • Unintentional concatenation in Bison/Yacc grammar.

    - by troutwine
    I am experimenting with lex and yacc and have run into a strange issue, but I think it would be best to show you my code before detailing the issue. This is my lexer: %{ #include <stdlib.h> #include <string.h> #include "y.tab.h" void yyerror(char *); %} %% [a-zA-Z]+ { yylval.strV = yytext; return ID; } [0-9]+ { yylval.intV = atoi(yytext); return INTEGER; } [\n] { return *yytext; } [ \t] ; . yyerror("invalid character"); %% int yywrap(void) { return 1; } This is my parser: %{ #include <stdio.h> int yydebug=1; void prompt(); void yyerror(char *); int yylex(void); %} %union { int intV; char *strV; } %token INTEGER ID %% program: program statement EOF { prompt(); } | program EOF { prompt(); } | { prompt(); } ; args: /* empty */ | args ID { printf(":%s ", $<strV>2); } ; statement: ID args { printf("%s", $<strV>1); } | INTEGER { printf("%d", $<intV>1); } ; EOF: '\n' %% void yyerror(char *s) { fprintf(stderr, "%s\n", s); } void prompt() { printf("> "); } int main(void) { yyparse(); return 0; } A very simple language, consisting of no more than strings and integer and a basic REPL. Now, you'll note in the parser that args are output with a leading colon, the intention being that, when combined with the first pattern of the rule of the statement the interaction with the REPL would look something like this: > aaa aa a :aa :a aaa> However, the interaction is this: > aaa aa a :aa :a aaa aa aa > Why does the token ID in the following rule statement: ID args { printf("%s", $<strV>1); } | INTEGER { printf("%d", $<intV>1); } ; have the semantic value of the total input string, newline included? How can my grammar be reworked so that the interaction I intended?

    Read the article

  • How to add words to an already loaded grammar using System.Speech and SAPI 5.3

    - by Kim Major
    Given the following code, Choices choices = new Choices(); choices.Add(new GrammarBuilder(new SemanticResultValue("product", "<product/>"))); GrammarBuilder builder = new GrammarBuilder(); builder.Append(new SemanticResultKey("options", choices.ToGrammarBuilder())); Grammar grammar = new Grammar(builder) { Name = Constants.GrammarNameLanguage}; grammar.Priority = priority; _recognition.LoadGrammar(grammar); How can I add additional words to the loaded grammar? I know this can be achieved both in native code and using the SpeechLib interop, but I prefer to use the managed library. Update: What I want to achieve, is not having to load an entire grammar repeatedly because of individual changes. For small grammars I got good results by calling _recognition.RequestRecognizerUpdate() and then doing the unload of the old grammar and loading of a rebuilt grammar in the event: void Recognition_RecognizerUpdateReached(object sender, RecognizerUpdateReachedEventArgs e) For large grammars this becomes too expensive.

    Read the article

  • Parsing a string, Grammar file.

    - by defn
    How would I separate the below string into its parts. What I need to separate is each < Word including the angle brackets from the rest of the string. So in the below case I would end up with several strings 1. "I have to break up with you because " 2. "< reason " (without the spaces) 3. " . But Let's still " 4. "< disclaimer " 5. " ." I have to break up with you because <reason> . But let's still <disclaimer> . below is what I currently have (its ugly...) boolean complete = false; int begin = 0; int end = 0; while (complete == false) { if (s.charAt(end) == '<'){ stack.add(new Terminal(s.substring(begin, end))); begin = end; } else if (s.charAt(end) == '>') { stack.add(new NonTerminal(s.substring(begin, end))); begin = end; end++; } else if (end == s.length()){ if (isTerminal(getSubstring(s, begin, end))){ stack.add(new Terminal(s.substring(begin, end))); } else { stack.add(new NonTerminal(s.substring(begin, end))); } complete = true; } end++;

    Read the article

  • boost::Spirit Grammar for unsorted schema

    - by Hassan Syed
    I have a section of a schema for a model that I need to parse. Lets say it looks like the following. { type = "Standard"; hostname="x.y.z"; port="123"; } The properties are: The elements may appear unordered. All elements that are part of the schema must appear, and no other. All of the elements' synthesised attributes go into a struct. (optional) The schema might in the future depend on the type field -- i.e., different fields based on type -- however I am not concerned about this at the moment.

    Read the article

  • code throws std::bad_alloc, not enough memory or can it be a bug?

    - by Andreas
    I am parsing using a pretty large grammar (1.1 GB, it's data-oriented parsing). The parser I use (bitpar) is said to be optimized for highly ambiguous grammars. I'm getting this error: 1terminate called after throwing an instance of 'std::bad_alloc' what(): St9bad_alloc dotest.sh: line 11: 16686 Aborted bitpar -p -b 1 -s top -u unknownwordsm -w pos.dfsa /tmp/gsyntax.pcfg /tmp/gsyntax.lex arbobanko.test arbobanko.results Is there hope? Does it mean that it has ran out of memory? It uses about 15 GB before it crashes. The machine I'm using has 32 GB of RAM, plus swap as well. It crashes before outputting a single parse tree. The parser is an efficient CYK chart parser using bit vector representations; I presume it is already near the limit of memory efficiency. If it really requires too much memory I could sample from the grammar rules, but this will decrease parse accuracy of course.

    Read the article

  • Grammar/own-written parser?

    - by wvd
    Hello all, I'm doing some small projects which involve having different syntaxis for something, however sometimes these syntaxis are so easy that using a parser generator might be overkill. Now, when should I use a own-made parser, and when should I use a parser generator? Thanks, William van Doorn

    Read the article

  • Check Your Spelling, Grammar, and Style in Firefox and Chrome

    - by Matthew Guay
    Are you tired of making simple writing mistakes that get past your browser’s spell-check?  Here’s how you can get advanced grammar check and more in Firefox and Chrome with After the Deadline. Microsoft Word has spoiled us with grammar, syntax, and spell checking, but the default spell check in Firefox and Chrome still only does basic checks.  Even webapps like Google Docs don’t check more than basic spelling errors.  However, WordPress.com is an exception; it offers advanced spelling, grammar, and syntax checking with its After the Deadline proofing system.  This helps you keep from making embarrassing mistakes on your blog posts, and now, thanks to a couple free browser plugins, it can help you keep from making these mistakes in any website or webapp. After the Deadline in Google Chrome Add the After the Deadline extension (link below) to Chrome as usual. As soon as it’s installed, you’re ready to start improving your online writing.  To check spelling, grammar, and more, click the ABC button that you’ll now see at the bottom of most text boxes online. After a quick scan, grammar mistakes are highlighted in green, complex expressions and other syntax problems are highlighted in blue, and spelling mistakes are highlighted in red as would be expected.  Click on an underlined word to choose one of its recommended changes or ignore the suggestion. Or, if you want more explanation about what was wrong with that word or phrase, click Explain for more info. And, if you forget to run an After the Deadline scan before submitting a text entry, it will automatically check to make sure you still want to submit it.  Click Cancel to go back and check your writing first.   To change the After the Deadline settings, click its icon in the toolbar and select View Options.  Additionally, if you want to disable it on the site you’re on, you can click Disable on this site directly from the popup. From the settings page, you can choose extra things to check for such as double negatives and redundant phrases, as well as add sites and words to ignore. After the Deadline in Firefox Add the After the Deadline add-on to Firefox (link below) as normal. After the Deadline basically the same in Firefox as it does in Chrome.  Select the ABC icon in the lower right corner of textboxes to check them for problems, and After the Deadline will underline the problems as it did in Chrome.  To view a suggested change in Firefox, right-click on the underlined word and select the recommended change or ignore the suggestion. And, if you forget to check, you’ll see a friendly reminder asking if you’re sure you want to submit your text like it is. You can access the After the Deadline settings in Firefox from the menu bar.  Click Tools, then select AtD Preferences.  In Firefox, the settings are in a options dialog with three tabs, but it includes the same options as the Chrome settings page.  Here you can make After the Deadline as correction-happy as you like.   Conclusion The web has increasingly become an interactive place, and seldom does a day go by that we aren’t entering text in forms and comments that may stay online forever.  Even our insignificant tweets are being archived in the Library of Congress.  After the Deadline can help you make sure that your permanent internet record is as grammatically correct as possible.  Even though it doesn’t catch every problem, and even misses some spelling mistakes, it’s still a great help. Links Download the After the Deadline extension for Google Chrome Download the After the Deadline add-on for Firefox Similar Articles Productive Geek Tips Quick Tip: Disable Favicons in FirefoxStupid Geek Tricks: Duplicate a Tab with a Shortcut Key in Chrome or FirefoxHow to Disable the New Geolocation Feature in Google ChromeStupid Geek Tricks: Compare Your Browser’s Memory Usage with Google ChromeStop YouTube Videos from Automatically Playing in Chrome TouchFreeze Alternative in AutoHotkey The Icy Undertow Desktop Windows Home Server – Backup to LAN The Clear & Clean Desktop Use This Bookmarklet to Easily Get Albums Use AutoHotkey to Assign a Hotkey to a Specific Window Latest Software Reviews Tinyhacker Random Tips Acronis Online Backup DVDFab 6 Revo Uninstaller Pro Registry Mechanic 9 for Windows Easily Search Food Recipes With Recipe Chimp Tech Fanboys Field Guide Check these Awesome Chrome Add-ons iFixit Offers Gadget Repair Manuals Online Vista style sidebar for Windows 7 Create Nice Charts With These Web Based Tools

    Read the article

  • The following grammar is LL1, SLR, LR(1), LALR?

    - by Mike
    P - {D ; C} D - d; D| d C - c; C | c a) Is the grammar LL(1)? Explain your answer. b) Is the grammar SLR(1)? Explain your answer. c) Is the grammar LR(1)? Explain your answer. d) Is the grammar LALR? Explain your answer. As for my answers I actually got no for them all... so I'm thinking I did something wrong Here is my explanation. a) It is not LL(1) because it is not left factored. b) It is not SLR, because of the transition diagram item 2 ( which is... ) D- d . ; D D- d . We need to consult the follow set, Follow(D) = ; Therefore this is not SLR c) It is not LR(1) because of... item 1 P- {D.;C} , $ D- .d;D , ; D- .d , ; item 2 D- d.; D , ; D- d. , ; item 3 D- d; . D , ; D- .d;D , ; D- .d , ; Since item 2 goes to item 3 with ;, AND "D- d."'s (in item 2) look ahead token is also ;. this causes a reduce to shift conflict, therefore this grammar is not LR(1) d) This grammar is not LALR because it is not LR(1) Thanks for your help!

    Read the article

  • What does the q in a q-grammar stand for?

    - by Aru
    So I've been reading sites and the classic books on compilers, reading about s-grammar and q-grammars I wondered what the s and q stand for, I think the s stands for simple grammar. While the q...well, I have no idea. What does the q in a q-grammar stand for?

    Read the article

  • Difference between an LL and Recursive Descent parser?

    - by Noldorin
    I've recently being trying to teach myself how parsers (for languages/context-free grammars) work, and most of it seems to be making sense, except for one thing. I'm focusing my attention in particular on LL(k) grammars, for which the two main algorithms seem to be the LL parser (using stack/parse table) and the Recursive Descent parser (simply using recursion). As far as I can see, the recursive descent algorithm works on all LL(k) grammars and possibly more, whereas an LL parser works on all LL(k) grammars. A recursive descent parser is clearly much simpler than an LL parser to implement, however (just as an LL one is simply than an LR one). So my question is, what are the advantages/problems one might encounter when using either of the algorithms? Why might one ever pick LL over recursive descent, given that it works on the same set of grammars and is trickier to implement? Hopefully this question makes some amount of sense. Sorry if it doesn't - I blame my the fact that this entire subject is almost entirely new to me.

    Read the article

  • What does =*> mean with regards to context free grammars?

    - by incrediman
    I've been reading a couple books/online references about compiler theory, and keep seeing that particular operator coming up every once in a while (as seen here), specifically when the current topic is context free grammars. What does it mean? As well, how does it differ from =>? Explanations with examples distinguishing => from =*> would be most helpful.

    Read the article

  • Speech Recognition Grammar Rules using delphi code

    - by XBasic3000
    I need help to make ISeechRecoGrammar without using xml format. Like creating it on runtime on delphi. example: procedure TForm1.FormCreate(Sender: TObject); var AfterCmdState: ISpeechGrammarRuleState; temp : OleVariant; Grammar: ISpeechRecoGrammar; PropertiesRule: ISpeechGrammarRule; ItemRule: ISpeechGrammarRule; TopLevelRule: ISpeechGrammarRule; begin SpSharedRecoContext.EventInterests := SREAllEvents; Grammar := SpSharedRecoContext.CreateGrammar(m_GrammarId); TopLevelRule := Grammar.Rules.Add('TopLevelRule', SRATopLevel Or SRADynamic, 1); PropertiesRule := Grammar.Rules.Add('PropertiesRule', SRADynamic, 2); ItemRule := Grammar.Rules.Add('ItemRule', SRADynamic, 3); AfterCmdState := TopLevelRule.AddState; TopLevelRule.InitialState.AddWordTransition(AfterCmdState, 'test', temp, temp, '****', 0, temp, temp); Grammar.Rules.Commit; Grammar.CmdSetRuleState('TopLevelRule', SGDSActive); end; can someone reconstruct or midify this delphi code (above) to be exactly same function below(xml). <GRAMMAR LANGID="409"> <!-- "Constant" definitions --> <DEFINE> <ID NAME="RID_start" VAL="1"/> <ID NAME="PID_action" VAL="2"/> <ID NAME="PID_actionvalue" VAL="3"/> </DEFINE> <!-- Rule definitions --> <RULE NAME="start" ID="RID_start" TOPLEVEL="ACTIVE"> <P>i am</P> <RULEREF NAME="action" PROPNAME="action" PROPID="PID_action" /> <O>OK</O> </RULE> <RULE NAME="action"> <L PROPNAME="actionvalue" PROPID="PID_actionvalue"> <P VAL="1">albert</P> <P VAL="2">francis</P> <P VAL="3">alex</P> </L> </RULE> </GRAMMAR> sorry for my english...

    Read the article

  • Editing service for blogger with terrible English grammar

    - by Josh Moore
    I would like to write a technical blog. However, the biggest things holding me back is my poor spelling, punctuation, and grammar (I have all these problems even though I am a native English speaker). I am thinking about using a professional editing/proofreading service to fix my blog posts before I post them. However, given the content will be technical in nature (some articles will get into details of programming) and I would like to write them in markdown, I am not sure if the general online services will be a good fit. Can you recommend a editor (or company) that you like that can provide this service?

    Read the article

  • I need help translating this portion of the ECMAScript grammar?

    - by ChaosPandion
    I've been working on my own implementation of ECMAScript for quite some time now. I have basically done everything by hand to help gain a deep understanding of the process. Repeated attempts to analyze and understand this portion of the grammar have failed so I've been working on the run time instead. Now I am at a point were I will be working on object literals so I really need to polish my syntactic analyzer. Can anyone put this in terms a language parser novice could understand? My biggest source of confusion is the following: new MemberExpression Arguments This is supposed to be a member expression, but this seemingly conflicts with the following: NewExpression : MemberExpression new NewExpression Is a new expression a member expression or a left hand side expression? To be honest I am having trouble laying out the proper C# classes for the concrete grammar. MemberExpression : PrimaryExpression FunctionExpression MemberExpression [ Expression ] MemberExpression . IdentifierName new MemberExpression Arguments NewExpression : MemberExpression new NewExpression CallExpression : MemberExpression Arguments CallExpression Arguments CallExpression [ Expression ] CallExpression . IdentifierName LeftHandSideExpression : NewExpression CallExpression

    Read the article

  • Whay types of grammar files are usable for spoken voice recognition?

    - by user1413199
    I'm using the System.Speech library in C# and I would like to create a smaller file to house commands as opposed to the default grammar. I'm not totally sure what I need. I've been looking at several different things but I don't really have any idea what I'm doing. I've read up on some stuff in ANTLR and looked at NuGram from NuEcho. I understand what a grammar file is and roughly how to create one but I'm not sure how they're used specifically for deciphering spoken words.

    Read the article

  • Preffered lambda syntax?

    - by Roger Alsing
    I'm playing around a bit with my own C like DSL grammar and would like some oppinions. I've reserved the use of "(...)" for invocations. eg: foo(1,2); My grammar supports "trailing closures" , pretty much like Ruby's blocks that can be passed as the last argument of an invocation. Currently my grammar support trailing closures like this: foo(1,2) { //parameterless closure passed as the last argument to foo } or foo(1,2) [x] { //closure with one argument (x) passed as the last argument to foo print (x); } The reason why I use [args] instead of (args) is that (args) is ambigious: foo(1,2) (x) { } There is no way in this case to tell if foo expects 3 arguments (int,int,closure(x)) or if foo expects 2 arguments and returns a closure with one argument(int,int) - closure(x) So thats pretty much the reason why I use [] as for now. I could change this to something like: foo(1,2) : (x) { } or foo(1,2) (x) -> { } So the actual question is, what do you think looks best? [...] is somewhat wrist unfriendly. let x = [a,b] { } Ideas?

    Read the article

  • Preferred lambda syntax?

    - by Roger Alsing
    I'm playing around a bit with my own C like DSL grammar and would like some oppinions. I've reserved the use of "(...)" for invocations. eg: foo(1,2); My grammar supports "trailing closures" , pretty much like Ruby's blocks that can be passed as the last argument of an invocation. Currently my grammar support trailing closures like this: foo(1,2) { //parameterless closure passed as the last argument to foo } or foo(1,2) [x] { //closure with one argument (x) passed as the last argument to foo print (x); } The reason why I use [args] instead of (args) is that (args) is ambigious: foo(1,2) (x) { } There is no way in this case to tell if foo expects 3 arguments (int,int,closure(x)) or if foo expects 2 arguments and returns a closure with one argument(int,int) - closure(x) So thats pretty much the reason why I use [] as for now. I could change this to something like: foo(1,2) : (x) { } or foo(1,2) (x) -> { } So the actual question is, what do you think looks best? [...] is somewhat wrist unfriendly. let x = [a,b] { } Ideas?

    Read the article

  • Search tool that uses a grammar rather than regular expression?

    - by Tom Hubbard
    Are there any search tools that allow you to set up a simple token/grammar parsing system that work similar to regular expressions? What we want to do is search our ColdFusion code for queries that do not have cfqueryparams in them. A regular expression gets a bit tough in this situation because I can't keep track of the start tags while looking for something else before getting an end tag. It seems like a parsing system would work more accurately.

    Read the article

  • Correcting Grammar for Microsoft Products and Technology

    I see book authors, editors, bloggers, press, team members, and occasionally even a VP misspell our products, technologies, and features that I thought I would build and maintain a list of the correct capitalization and spelling of the most commonly misspelled Microsoft products and technologies. Sources: Internal site (brandtools) and the Microsoft Trademarks Web site. Last updated: April 27, 2010   Incorrect Correct .net or .Net .NET .Net framework 4.0, .NET framework 4.0 .NET Framework AdCenter, Ad Center, Adcenter adCenter Ado.net, ADO.Net ADO.NET Asp.net, ASP.Net ASP.NET Asp.Net ajax, Asp.NET Ajax ASP.NET AJAX Asp.Net Mvc ASP.NET MVC Biz Spark, Bizspark BizSpark Clear Type, Clear type, Cleartype ClearType Directaccess, Direct Access DirectAccess Direct Show, Directshow DirectShow Direct X DirectX Dream Spark, Dreamspark DreamSpark Home Group, Home group HomeGroup HotMail, Hot Mail Hotmail Info Path, Infopath InfoPath Intellisense, Intellisense IntelliSense Iron Ruby IronRuby Kin KIN Linq LINQ MSN Messenger Windows Live Messenger One Note, Onenote OneNote Open type, Opentype OpenType PlayTo, Play to Play To Power Point, Powerpoint PowerPoint Powershell, Power Shell PowerShell Sea Dragon, Seadragon SeaDragon Sharepoint, Share Point SharePoint Silver Light, SilverLight Silverlight Skydrive, Sky Drive SkyDrive Sql Server SQL Server Visual Basic .net (the .net was removed in the 2005 version) Visual Basic  Visual C# Express 2010 or Visual Basic Express 2010 or Visual C++ Express 2010 Visual version 2010 Express as in Visual C# 2010 Express, Visual Basic 2010 Express Visual Studio 2010 Team Foundation Server Visual Studio Team Foundation Server 2010 Visual Studio Ultimate 2010 or Visual Studio Professional 2010 Visual Studio 2010 version, as in Visual Studio 2010 Ultimate, Visual Studio 2010 Professional WebSite Spark, Website spark Website Spark Win 32 Win32 Windows Mobile (except when referring to previous versions like 5.0 or 6), Windows phone 7 Series Windows Phone Xaml XAML XBOX, xbox Xbox Xbox Live, XBOX Live Xbox LIVE   Caveats These guidelines dont apply to URLs (ex: www.asp.net) or to code namespaces, variables, and classes should follow the .NET Framework naming guidelines. This list only covers capitalization/spacing rules, it doesnt cover the correct usage of (tm) or symbols or the correct word usage rules. For those, refer to the trademark Web site. Also note that I have no idea why we are so inconsistent say on keeping features/brands two words versus one word or the order of product/version/year.Did you know that DotNetSlackers also publishes .net articles written by top known .net Authors? We already have over 80 articles in several categories including Silverlight. Take a look: here.

    Read the article

  • Right recursive grammar or left recursive?

    - by user2485710
    I have little to no knowledge of what I'm about to ask, so I would like a suggestion based on the level of skills required to implemented a parser for the given grammar ( since I'm a beginner in this kind of formal approach to parsers and languages ). Just by going back of a couple of years, this situation reminds me a little of Pascal grammar vs C/C++ grammar, this left vs right stuff. But I'm not going to do any of that, my purpose is to implement a simple parser for a markup language for documents like Markdown. So considering that I'm starting with a markup language in mind, I want to keep things simple, which is the easiest one to handle between this 2 options and why . Another kind of grammar could be an easier option for me ? If yes which one do you suggest ?

    Read the article

  • How to transform a production to LL(1) grammar for a list separated by a semicolon?

    - by Subb
    Hi, I'm reading this introductory book on parsing (which is pretty good btw) and one of the exercice is to "build a parser for your favorite language." Since I don't want to die today, I thought I could do a parser for something relatively simple, ie a simplified CSS. Note: This book teach you how to right a LL(1) parser using the recursive-descent algorithm. So, as a sub-exercice, I am building the grammar from what I know of CSS. But I'm stuck on a production that I can't transform in LL(1) : //EBNF block = "{", declaration, {";", declaration}, [";"], "}" //BNF <block> =:: "{" <declaration> "}" <declaration> =:: <single-declaration> <opt-end> | <single-declaration> ";" <declaration> <opt-end> =:: "" | ";" This describe a CSS block. Valid block can have the form : { property : value } { property : value; } { property : value; property : value } { property : value; property : value; } ... The problem is with the optional ";" at the end, because it overlap with the starting character of {";", declaration}, so when my parser meet a semicolon in this context, it doesn't know what to do. The book talk about this problem, but in its example, the semicolon is obligatory, so the rule can be modified like this : block = "{", declaration, ";", {declaration, ";"}, "}" So, Is it possible to achieve what I'm trying to do using a LL(1) parser?

    Read the article

  • What makes one language any better than another when both are designed for the same goals? [closed]

    - by Justin808
    I'm in the process of creating a grammar for a scripting language but as I'm working on it I started to wonder what makes a language good in the first place. I know the goals for my script but there are always 1000 different ways to go about doing things. Goals: Easy to use and understand (not my grandma could do it easy, but the secretary at the front desk could do it or the VP of marketing could do it type of easy) No user defined functions or subroutines. Its use would be in events of objects in a system similar to HyperCard. Conceptually I was thinking of a language like this: set myVariable to 'Hello World' set counter to 0 repeat 5 times with x begin set counter to counter add x end set myVariable to myVariable plus ' ' plus counter popup myVariable set text of label named 'label' to 'new text' set color of label named 'label' to blue The end result would popup a dialog with the contents Hello World 15 it would also change the text of a label and make it blue. But I could do the same thing 1000 different ways. So what makes one language any better than another when both are designed for the same goals?

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >