World: r3wp
[Parse] Discussion of PARSE dialect
older newer | first last |
MaxV 15-Mar-2011 [5485] | Did you see http://www.rebol.org/view-script.r?script=supercalculator.r&sid=f4jz (script start in the just last 20 lines) instead of parse you can use "replace/all" and work evene better |
Geocaching 15-Mar-2011 [5486x4] | Ladislav, thanks for your comments... I will have a closer look on this associativity issue. |
MaxV. Yes, I have seen supercalculator but it crashes on simple expression like sqrt(1-3)/(1+4)... | |
MaxV sorry, my mistake... normal it crashes :) But when i tried it, it fails on an expression... I do not remember which one... | |
MaxV: supercaclulator fails on 1/-(3+2) | |
Ladislav 15-Mar-2011 [5490] | regarding the supercalculator - it has wrong associativity as well |
Geocaching 15-Mar-2011 [5491x2] | like parse-equation.r did yesterday btw :) |
Ladislav... sorry, what should be the code returned? | |
Ladislav 15-Mar-2011 [5493] | in which case? |
Geocaching 15-Mar-2011 [5494] | 3-3+3 |
Ladislav 15-Mar-2011 [5495] | add subtract 3 3 3 |
Geocaching 15-Mar-2011 [5496] | Do you have an example where this would make a difference? |
Ladislav 15-Mar-2011 [5497x2] | >> subtract 3.0 add 3.0 3.0 == -3.0 >> add subtract 3.0 3.0 3.0 == 3.0 |
I think, that counts as a difference | |
Geocaching 15-Mar-2011 [5499x2] | oups :) |
Do you think that parsing reversal would fix the problem | |
Ladislav 15-Mar-2011 [5501x2] | not completely |
you need to realize, that the ** operator is right-associative | |
Geocaching 15-Mar-2011 [5503x2] | I should review some basic math stuff :)) |
Ladislav... according to wiki, addition, subtraction, multiplication and division are left-assiciative... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operator_associativity | |
Ladislav 15-Mar-2011 [5505] | yes |
Geocaching 15-Mar-2011 [5506x2] | Now that I take a paper and a pen... left-associativity is indeed natural :) |
So natural that i forgot about the associativity when thinking on how to split an expression i successive blocks! So stupid! | |
Ladislav 15-Mar-2011 [5508] | :-D |
Geocaching 15-Mar-2011 [5509] | Thanks for pointing this. Hopefully, I have been clever not to mark this version as 1.0.0 :) |
Ladislav 15-Mar-2011 [5510] | I put my %evaluate.r script processing operators with different priorities and associativities to the http://www.rebol.org/view-script.r?script=evaluate.r as well, since I think there it will be more accessible to the public |
Geocaching 15-Mar-2011 [5511x2] | Your script is so much more complicated :)... maybe why it works... Good idea to put on rebol.org! |
A quick doc to show how to use it? | |
Ladislav 15-Mar-2011 [5513x2] | Much more complicated - do not forget it processes three different rule sets, each of which uses different priorities and associativities. |
How to use it: check the examples at the bottom | |
Geocaching 15-Mar-2011 [5515x2] | yes... the concept of "rule sets" is not straightforward :) what do you mean by this? |
OK... very nice indeed! But can I use "unknown variable" | |
Ladislav 15-Mar-2011 [5517x4] | the rule sets are described in the comments to the SRA, STD and RLE functions |
>> mold sra [3 - 3 + 3] translate == "[subtract 3 add 3 3]" >> mold std [3 - 3 + 3] translate == "[add subtract 3 3 3]" | |
unknown variable ? you need to use the %use-rule.r script: http://www.rebol.org/view-script.r?script=use-rule.r | |
I guess, that you actually want to use just the STD function | |
Geocaching 15-Mar-2011 [5521] | I will adopt your script! Impressive. But i am still wondering if with the strategy in my script it would be possible to implement associativity properly? |
Ladislav 15-Mar-2011 [5522x3] | well, if you modify it appropriately, why not? |
except, that it requires some care, since all the operators you use are left-associative, except for the exponentiation operator, which is right-associative | |
>> std [3 ** 3 ** 3] translate == [power 3 power 3 3] >> std [3 * 3 * 3] translate == [multiply multiply 3 3 3] | |
Geocaching 15-Mar-2011 [5525] | THat's why parsing reversal and taking care of ** specifically might be a good start... |
Ladislav 15-Mar-2011 [5526x2] | Parsing reversal does not help IMO, because you have to process both left- and right-associativity at the same time |
Notice, that my script parses left to right | |
Geocaching 15-Mar-2011 [5528x4] | I think I found a way... see you later today (or tomorraow). Again, many thanks for your feedback and congrat for your impressive script |
It was actually so easy to fix: 5 'append to change into 'insert... I still have to check this does not break anything before posting a new version on rebol.org. Ladislav... thank you again for pointing this bug! | |
Voilą... I renamed my script as parse-expression.r and it is on rebol.org ... http://www.rebol.org/script-information.r?script-name=parse-expression.r I just had to repace 5 'append into 'insert, so it fixing this big did not brak the "philosophy" of the implementation. Ouf :) Example: >> do parse-expression "-(-3+2)+3-2+3-sqrt((1+2)**2)-2**3+34" == 28.0 | |
@Endo: I tried exponent with ^, but as it is the escape character for rebol, i consistently end up with an error. If enyone can help on this! For the english comment, I promise I will take the time to translate the french comments soon. | |
Gregg 15-Mar-2011 [5532] | Nice work Francois. Good conversation here too, with important details brought out by Ladislav. |
Geocaching 15-Mar-2011 [5533x2] | Yes... Ladislav reminds me some basic math! God, I felt so stupid about this associativity bug! The reason why I developped parse-expression.r is because I need it to build an companion app for one of the best math book: Calculus 3d edition from Smith & Minton! For now, I have developped a rebol library to transform any vid face into a function plotter, and parse-expression.r allows me to use human readable expression in the gui instead of guru rebol code :) |
Ladislav: How would you interpret x**-1/2 : (1) [divide power x -1 2] or (2) [power x divide -1 2] A previous version of parse-expression.r returned (2)... but i considered this as a bug and changed it for (1) (see history 0.9.2 in the header of the script). But now, with our discussion on associativity, i am not sure anymore... Thanks for your help! | |
older newer | first last |