[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Reply to: [list | sender only]
Re: [ddlm-group] A modest addition to the DDLm spec. .. .
- To: Nick.Spadaccini@uwa.edu.au, Group finalising DDLm and associated dictionaries <ddlm-group@iucr.org>
- Subject: Re: [ddlm-group] A modest addition to the DDLm spec. .. .
- From: "Herbert J. Bernstein" <yaya@bernstein-plus-sons.com>
- Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 22:55:33 -0400 (EDT)
- In-Reply-To: <C8CB4F0E.1413D%nick@csse.uwa.edu.au>
- References: <C8CB4F0E.1413D%nick@csse.uwa.edu.au>
You also can't have comments inside a semicolon delimited text string, nor inside the other quoted strings. ===================================================== Herbert J. Bernstein, Professor of Computer Science Dowling College, Kramer Science Center, KSC 121 Idle Hour Blvd, Oakdale, NY, 11769 +1-631-244-3035 yaya@dowling.edu ===================================================== On Fri, 1 Oct 2010, Nick Spadaccini wrote: > In my original spec I wrote it (at least in my mind) with embedded comments > as allowed in the compound data types, list and table since these were > comprised of other tokens (it was easier when these were comma separated, > but still workable in the space separated version). You can't have it in a > triple quote because # is a legitimate character within that structure. > > > On 1/10/10 4:01 AM, "Herbert J. Bernstein" <yaya@bernstein-plus-sons.com> > wrote: > >> The confusion arises from the original CIF 1.1 document which >> first discusses the allow whitespace characters, and then the >> syntax token <WhiteSpace>. We should clarify it, but we >> should clarify the role of whitespace both for CIF1 and CIF2, >> not just in the CIF2 change document. >> >> In any case, it appears that what we have so far _does_ permit >> comments within bracketed constructs. >> >> ===================================================== >> Herbert J. Bernstein, Professor of Computer Science >> Dowling College, Kramer Science Center, KSC 121 >> Idle Hour Blvd, Oakdale, NY, 11769 >> >> +1-631-244-3035 >> yaya@dowling.edu >> ===================================================== >> >> On Thu, 30 Sep 2010, Bollinger, John C wrote: >> >>> >>> On Thursday, September 30, 2010 2:37 PM, Herbert J. Bernstein wrote: >>> >>>> Working from the original DDLm/dREL spec, I did not see anything >>>> precluding comments within bracketed >costructs and have therefore >>>> programmed on the assumption that they have to be allowed. The CIF2 spec >>>> simply >does not discuss the issue, but explcitly allows whitespace within >>>> bracketed constructs. >>>> >>>> We should decide what we really want here and document it >>> >>> On Thursday, September 30, 2010 2:42 PM, Herbert J. Bernstein wrote; >>>> In paragraph 46, the CIF 1.1 spec says: >>>> >>>> 46. White space comprises all appropriate combinations of spaces, tabs, ends >>>> of lines and comments, as well as the beginning of the file. >>> <WhiteSpace> are the characters able to delimit the lexical tokens. >>>> >>>> So, as things now stand the proposed CIF2 spec _would_ allow comments within >>>> bracketed construct because it explcitly permits whitespace in bracketed >>>> constructs. >>> >>> Unfortunately, the current draft of the Changes document contains a >>> definition of "whitespace" that does not include comments. I'm not sure how >>> that came about or whether it has some purpose I do not see, but I find it a >>> bit strange. I think it would at times be useful to have comments in >>> bracketed structures, and my existing code will allow it (in part because I >>> didn't recognize until now that there was a question about it). >>> >>> Is there a reason why we should not reintroduce comments to the definition of >>> whitespace? >>> >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> John >>> -- >>> John C. Bollinger, Ph.D. >>> Department of Structural Biology >>> St. Jude Children's Research Hospital >>> >>> >>> Email Disclaimer: www.stjude.org/emaildisclaimer >>> _______________________________________________ >>> ddlm-group mailing list >>> ddlm-group@iucr.org >>> http://scripts.iucr.org/mailman/listinfo/ddlm-group >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> ddlm-group mailing list >> ddlm-group@iucr.org >> http://scripts.iucr.org/mailman/listinfo/ddlm-group > > cheers > > Nick > > -------------------------------- > Associate Professor N. Spadaccini, PhD > School of Computer Science & Software Engineering > > The University of Western Australia t: +61 (0)8 6488 3452 > 35 Stirling Highway f: +61 (0)8 6488 1089 > CRAWLEY, Perth, WA 6009 AUSTRALIA w3: www.csse.uwa.edu.au/~nick > MBDP M002 > > CRICOS Provider Code: 00126G > > e: Nick.Spadaccini@uwa.edu.au > > > > > _______________________________________________ > ddlm-group mailing list > ddlm-group@iucr.org > http://scripts.iucr.org/mailman/listinfo/ddlm-group > _______________________________________________ ddlm-group mailing list ddlm-group@iucr.org http://scripts.iucr.org/mailman/listinfo/ddlm-group
Reply to: [list | sender only]
- References:
- Re: [ddlm-group] A modest addition to the DDLm spec. .. . (Nick Spadaccini)
- Prev by Date: Re: [ddlm-group] A modest addition to the DDLm spec. .
- Next by Date: Re: [ddlm-group] A modest addition to the DDLm spec. .
- Prev by thread: Re: [ddlm-group] A modest addition to the DDLm spec. .. .
- Next by thread: Re: [ddlm-group] A modest addition to the DDLm spec. .. .
- Index(es):