|
You can't delete once there is a reply - I could dispose of the whole thread for you, but it does no harm to leave it here and add an article / tip anyway, so I'll leave it alone.
There is another possibility since this it Github based, which is a Project: Your GitHub Project on CodeProject[^]
Be aware that your Readme.md will need to be pretty solid, as the moderation criteria for a Project are pretty much the same as those for an Article; a lot higher than required for a Tip.
I look forward to seeing the results!
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
So I've been bugging out on a way to do LL(k) parsing and while I was stewing on that I was also coding on the slang parser parsley generated.
And I realized something. If Parsley can import other parsers, share symbol tables and lexers with them, and then delegate to them, what's to stop Parsley from simply using multiple parser algorithms to parse something?
each sub-parser, sub grammar, could be LL(1) (possibly LL(k)) table driven, recursive descent, LALR(1) or whatever as appropriate.
The only issue right now is error and continue in the recursive descent form, and possibly the lalr(1) form.
If I can work out those issues, then i can let parsley choose the algorithm to use for each imported grammar.
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
|
|
|
|
|
Question - would you say a DNA encoding is something that is ever 'parsed'?
|
|
|
|
|
Certainly not with an LL(1) parser. 
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
|
|
|
|
|
What I'm interested in is the fact that there's really no proof that DNA or genes influence much past physical characteristics. I know from links sent to me by white supremacists that some scientists keep grasping for gene combinations for intelligence but as I understand there's basically nothing there....
|
|
|
|
|
You must not be familiar with the studies that have been done in that regard. Not supremacist stuff, but real science.
Just google twins studies nature vs nurture - Google Search[^]
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
|
Can confirm.
I've been doing some work for the biggest twin study in the world, The Swedish Twin Registry | Karolinska Institutet[^], and I can't stress enough what a sacrifice some of these twins are doing for us, mostly
on a completely voluntary basis.
I can not go into specifics of course, GDPR and contract and such stuff, but there are plenty of more links at the link above.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Care to elaborate?
And please keep it clean enough for the Lounge. You have been a bit over the border elsewhere in this thread. Remember, the soapbox is gone for a reason.
|
|
|
|
|
I have become bitter in my old age.
I did Wacken, then Brutal Assault in Czech Republic, then Sabaton Open Air in Falun. We then flew to Norway to see Rammstein before spending a few days in Gothenburg and Stockholm. We also spent a day in Denmark on our way through. Out of it all, I LOVED Sweden.
|
|
|
|
|
Sounds like quite a trip.
Should have called when in Sweden. I live outside of Gothenburg.
|
|
|
|
|
That would have been awesome. I loved Gothenburg. I bought home In Flames tonic water, ate at 2112, drank In Flames gin at a steampunk bar..... There's an amazing metal bar there as well, really seedy, but super awesome.
|
|
|
|
|
A lot of those old twin studies have been debunked. Stuff like 'they both married a red head called Karen' is basically just not true
|
|
|
|
|
I think for the most part, both the mind and DNA are too complex for us to try to put our systems of quantification and classification on it. They're simply too overwhelming. It's a good way to remind us how minor and ignorant we still are - a bunch of apes with a parlor trick on a spinning ball of mud, hurtling through the unfashionable end of the western spiral arm of the galaxy.
Anyone trying to claw out some form of supremacy in the face of that? Well it just seems desperate, and kind of funny, but sad too.
The universe is too big for such nonsense.
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, yeah, people who are sure their skin colour makes them better are basically people who have achieved nothing in life. But sadly, here and in the USA, their message is on the ascendant, that's why its important to do more than laugh and walk away
And yeah, the whole thing is insanely complex. The book I'm reading at the moment is called 'the third ape'. Apparently we're only 3% removed from chimps. I think we're closer to chimps than bonobos, which is a pity
|
|
|
|
|
Human foolishness is cyclic. We're repeating ancient patterns. Right now the west is in decline, and while I'd get some pushback for referring to it as a meta-empire, that's what the west is. Anyway, empires apex. The US particularly hit its apex in the late 80s to mid 90s, depending on which rubber ruler you use.
After that, every generation was bound to be worse off than the one that came before it, either in real terms, or in equity. We're experiencing that now.
And when people face loss, particularly of things they take for granted, like is happening with the white middle class in the US, they go looking for people to blame.
And that's how fascism happens, ladies and gents.
As economic fortunes of the majority class (petit borgie) sour, messages like white supremacist messages will come out of the woodwork.
Blame the blacks.
Blame the queers.
Blame the immigrants.
Blame the commies.
Blame everyone but ourselves for the mess we find ourselves in.
Such is the rallying cry of the hopelessly angry, frightened and lost.
There's not much to do at this point but ride it out - our window for heading it off closed about 20 years ago - at least in the United States.
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
|
|
|
|
|
honey the codewitch wrote: As economic fortunes of the majority class (petit borgie) sour, messages like white supremacist messages will come out of the woodwork.
You must not be paying attention to the numbers on the economy. The middle class is doing as well as it's done in the last 50 years. Unemployment is virtually non-existent, including for minorities.
honey the codewitch wrote: Blame the blacks.
Blame the queers.
Blame the immigrants.
Blame the commies.
You forgot to include the Jews. White supremacists hate Jews especially.
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
modified 4-Jan-20 20:14pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Oh how fun.
All of this is true if you ignore the fact that we just stopped counting a bunch of unemployed people and the middle class is smaller as a percentage than it was 50 years ago and keeps getting smaller. More and more are joining the ranks of what used to be occupied by the poorer among the blue collar set.
Meanwhile, middle income earner wages have remained relatively stagnant compared to top earners ever since the 1970s, while cost of living and housing especially, has increased. This is part of why two person earning households are the norm now. it didn't used to be that way. Feminists might call it progress. Workers looking at the big picture might call it getting screwed.
Income inequality is runaway in the united states, and most of its citizens have no idea how bad it is because it's not talked about by the teevee bobbleheads.
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
|
|
|
|
|
Why should income be "equal?" Everybody does a different job with differing levels of competency.
Some jobs require more education and skills than other jobs.
I've never understood this notion that we all should be equal in every respect.
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not saying it should be equal. I'm saying what value does it add for CEOs to make hundreds of times what workers do? versus say 20 times? 50 times? I think it's fair to consider diminishing returns here.
And what value does it add shifting the tax burden downward, rather than upward?
Progressive taxation is necessary for a functioning capitalist economy. The chicago school brats seem to have forgotten that.
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
|
|
|
|
|
These are all good questions. But that's how a free market works. People get paid based upon what the market will bear, That's also what determines how much things cost for the consumer.
A CEO can make hundreds of times what the guy who mops the floor makes because he's hundreds of times more difficult to replace. Simple supply and demand laws apply here.
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
|
I believe the notion of a free market is either a myth or a scam depending on who is selling the idea and why.
The reason is this: All human activity has the potential to distort markets. No market can be separate from any interaction with it. Simply buying a product ultimately raises the price for the next consumer, unless the company produces another product to replace it (supply and demand microcosmically) - every activity. Even just having capital creates impact on markets. This is how neighborhoods get gentrified.
Laws impact markets. Buying impacts markets. Selling impacts markets. Looking at a market side ways will impact it (see doom and gloom predictions tanking the dow)
There's no free market. Every market is endlessly distorted.
People disagree on what should be "allowed" to distort markets, but that itself is just another distortion of markets.
The markets are currently being distorted overall in favor of the top earners, as Adam Smith famously predicted happens in all capitalist systems, absent adequate progressive taxation.
We can see this tied directly to income inequality.
The more it grows, the more the capitalist class have their thumbs on the scale
And the reason for all of their sophisticated sounding economic voodoo is to distract you from that plain and simple fact.
Of course, if you're one of the (rarer every day) americans that are doing well, you have every reason to believe all of that hoodoo because it's self actualizing, regardless of how true it is. (There are a lot of reasons people do well or not, and merit is maybe middling on that list at best)
Edit: I have to run for now. I've enjoyed our chat.
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
|
|
|
|
|
honey the codewitch wrote: There's no free market.
I'd suggest there's no 'efficient' market - and hope there's room for some kind of ethical trade.
|
|
|
|
|
I think I understand where you're coming from. For my part, I'm not sure if markets are efficient or not due to their "organic" nature. What I mean by that is that markets are a form of Complex Adaptive System.
Such systems have redundancy, like 20 outfits selling the same product, but also resilience. If one goes out of business you can still get your gear.
So whether that's inefficient or not, as an example, I think depends on which rubber ruler you use.
Just my $0.02, as a CAS geek.
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
|
|
|
|
|
'The Wealth of Nations' made sense when it was written but is irrelevant now. Markets are not fair, or open or free
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
