[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Reply to: [list | sender only]
Re: [ddlm-group] Eliding in triple-quoted strings: Proposals C andD. .. .. .
- To: Group finalising DDLm and associated dictionaries <ddlm-group@iucr.org>
- Subject: Re: [ddlm-group] Eliding in triple-quoted strings: Proposals C andD. .. .. .
- From: "Herbert J. Bernstein" <yaya@bernstein-plus-sons.com>
- Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2011 08:30:11 -0500 (EST)
- In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=T_8SpWSMR+JLOkOPBNLN9a=BM3LTsuhNiHBSE@mail.gmail.com>
- References: <AANLkTimWpd1kMZDGcTprEhcJw+uQE4_JtgJ4SbtMPVXt@mail.gmail.com><263453.61027.qm@web87016.mail.ird.yahoo.com><alpine.BSF.2.00.1101070742350.2950@epsilon.pair.com><4D271B81.2050501@rcsb.rutgers.edu><a06240801c94d1ffe02d9@192.168.2.102><a06240803c94d2f76a2fd@192.168.2.102><alpine.BSF.2.00.1101071751360.51580@epsilon.pair.com><887485.54364.qm@web87009.mail.ird.yahoo.com><a06240800c94d6498a375@192.168.2.102><AANLkTi=T_8SpWSMR+JLOkOPBNLN9a=BM3LTsuhNiHBSE@mail.gmail.com>
Dear James, You are clearly a much better programmer than I am. When I got down into the interactions among the treble quote, single quotes, text fields, elides, the bracketed constructs and comments in the lexical scan, I found the going tough. If you have it done neatly, I would greatly appreciate seeing it. I think we need a face to face meeting or Skype meeting to resolve not just this one issue, but the process of getting a workable CIF2. Perhaps we can finally get to do that in Madrid. Regards, Herbert ===================================================== 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 Sat, 8 Jan 2011, James Hester wrote: > I can't let these assertions go unchallenged: > > On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 12:04 PM, Herbert J. Bernstein > <yaya@bernstein-plus-sons.com> wrote: >> Dear Simon, >> >> Adoption of Ralf's proposal will ... >> >> 1. Make it much easier to create a CIF2 parser, because for one of >> the messiest parts of the code we will have a clear specification, >> sample code and a way to validate the tough cases. > > If we adopt a simpler spec than the Python in toto spec: > - there will be many fewer tough cases > - there will be a simpler and therefore clearer specification > - for many alternative schemes the lexer will be unchanged from the > current version, with the elide behaviour > simply requiring a search and replace following lexing > Triple-quoted string handling is not currently a messy part of the > code, I don't understand why you think this. It will become > significantly more complex under Ralf's proposal. > >> 2. Make it easier for users to conform the the quoting rules, because >> at least that one part of CIF2 will be thoroughly documented with lots >> of examples. > > Quoting rules are not rocket science. About 3 examples will be > enough, if we adopt a simple specification rather > than the unicode+raw+lots of escapes that the Python proposal entails. > Doing things the Python way would > imply more chance for user misunderstanding, especially bearing in > mind that CIF2 users are not necessarily > Python programmers or even programmers at all. For these users, there > is absolutely no benefit in adopting Python or any other language's > approach - they are unfamiliar with them all. > >> 3. Make is easier for the journals and archives to deal with "odd" >> CIF2 files containing complex treble quoted strings because at >> least that one part of CIF2 will be throughly documented with lots >> of examples, and, with a utility (IDLE) all ready to allow them >> to pull out a troublesome treble-quoted string and figure out what >> it means or what it might mean if some intuitive change were made. > > The simpler the spec, the less likely mistakes will be made and the > less chance of ambiguity. > >> Yes, if Ralf's proposal happens to be rejected, we will still have >> a problem in the lack of elide handling, and yes we will have to >> put in the time an effort to consider those alternatives, but, first, >> in order to have some chance of finishing the specification of CIF2 >> before the summer meeting deadlines (at least one of which is in >> just a little more than 3 weeks), might it not be a good idea >> to discuss and consider what was actually proposed instead of >> chasing after lots of plausible alternatives that we already discussed >> and rejected, and so are not very likely to agree upon rapidly now. > > I have some hope that, by restricting our discussion to treble-quoted > strings, we can make progress compared to previous attempts. I have > considered and discussed at length Ralf's proposal, and would be > interested in your responses to my particular objections. > >> So, before I will delve into the many subtle variations of elide >> mechanisms, I would appreciate our finishing consideration of Ralf's >> actual proposal: >> >> ======================= >> >> His revised wording (with one correction) is: >> >> ======================== >> >> CHANGE 7 NEW >> >> >> Triple-quote delimited strings. >> >> The following ASCII sequences delimit the beginning of a string: >> >> """ >> ''' >> r""" >> r''' >> u""" >> u''' >> >> The characters following the delimiter sequence are interpreted >> with exactly the same algorithm as implemented for triple-quoted >> strings in the Python programming language version 2 series. >> In this algorithm, triple-quoted strings are terminated by matching >> """ or ''' delimiters. >> >> For example >> >> """He said "His name is O'Hearly".""" >> r'''In {\bf \TeX} the accents are \' and \".''' >> >> Triple-quoted strings provide a reliable mechanism for storing any >> arbitrary string in a CIF2 file. >> >> ========================= >> >> This is cleaner and simpler than the original change 7 wording. >> It probably does not conflict with existing CIF1 documents and the >> _only_ CIF2 documents it can conflict with are the very few >> that happen to end in \""" or \''''. The new leading delimiters >> r""", r''', u""" and u''' will have to be added to the list of forbidden >> starts to white-space delimited data values in change 5. In exchange for >> this minor adjustments to valid CIF2 syntax we gain a fully documented, >> software supported way to include arbitrary strings in a CIF2 document >> that people are already used to working with. >> >> I have reviewed the discussion of the "use of elides in strings" >> thread in the ddlm-group discussion list, and, while I did not >> then and do not now understand the objections to the general use >> of elides in quoted strings, I particularly do not understand >> the logic of objecting to the use of elides in treble-quoted strings, >> which are a construct completely new to CIF and therefore in >> conflict with no existing data files. >> >> Would those who have an objection to Ralf's proposal please >> state their objections. An objection that says we object because >> in past discussions another body could not manage to come to an >> agreement and just gave up does not speak to the merits of this >> specific proposal. >> >> I have no idea why we are considering other proposals before >> settling the status of Ralf's proposal. > > It is also useful to know what the alternatives might be when > considering a proposal. > >> I agree with Ralf's proposal. >> >> Regards, >> Herbert >> >> At 12:37 AM +0000 1/8/11, SIMON WESTRIP wrote: >>> Dear Herbert >>> >>> I fail to see how the adoption of python string quoting rules is going to >>> make life easier for anyone other than a python programmer? >>> Even then, the mechanism is restricted to treble-quoted strings, >>> which are only >>> one part of CIF. Maybe I've missed something, but just because CIF might share >>> common syntax with a programming language in one respect, does not >>> necessarily mean >>> that the tools of that medium are available to CIF? >>> >>> If you're looking to base CIF extensions on established mechanisms, >>> why not adopt >>> the minimal \(newline) and \\ escape sequences, which in essence are >>> the same as >>> the established CIF line-folding protocol (just dropping the initial >>> \ following the opening >>> delimiter and formalising the protocol as an inherent part of the >>> spec). Afterall, I beleive you >>> have already been using it, or at least interpreted it, as a means >>> to escape 'semicolon delimiters' within >>> semicolon-delimited values (I seem to recall discussions that >>> identified an issue with the published 'trip tests' >>> relating to line folding). >>> >>> Forgive me if I have missed something regarding the usefulness of >>> python in CIF; please enlighten me >>> as to its benefits if I were to write a CIF reader using anything >>> but python. As far as I can see, the only >>> advantages lie in the fact that the logic is established and thus >>> unquestionable; but that does not mean it is >>> necessarily entirely appropriate for CIF (which afterall isn't a >>> programming language). >>> >>> Cheers >>> >>> Simon >>> >>> >>> >>> From: Herbert J. Bernstein <yaya@bernstein-plus-sons.com> >>> To: Group finalising DDLm and associated dictionaries <ddlm-group@iucr.org> >>> Sent: Friday, 7 January, 2011 23:07:40 >>> Subject: Re: [ddlm-group] Eliding in triple-quoted strings: >>> Proposals C and D. .. .. . >>> >>> Dear Colleagues, >>> >>> Ralf's proposal is what it is. Before we go haring off in other >>> directions, we should respond constructively to what he has proposed. >>> I support it. Ralf and John W. support it. John B. and James H. >>> oppose it. I think they are mistaken because ... >>> >>> It is well and good to adopt a "Real Programmers Don't Each >>> Quiche" let's-start-from-scratch-and-roll-our-own approach when >>> you have the resources to accomplish our goals that way. It >>> is a lot of fun, and has the potential to truly advance the >>> field, but it is also, in the current funding climate, unrealistic. >>> >>> In the U.S., there is a serious prospect to science funding being >>> cut back so severely that the hit rates on grants next year may >>> be as low as 1 in 10. I suspect an honest review of funding prospects >>> in other countries will uncover similarly dire warnings. >>> >>> This does not mean we are all going out of buisness, but we do have >>> to be careful to conserve resources and focus our do-it-from-scratch >>> efforts on those areas that have the highest priority, and I fear, >>> for most of our community, CIF2, while important, is not likely to >>> be seen as worth that approach, and certainly filing the edges of >>> a brand-new treble quote spec is likely to be very far down >>> on anybody's priority list. >>> >>> Ralf has made a proposal that will save all of us a lot of effort >>> and allow us to devote more resources to higher priority problems. >>> >>> Not only is he right on this one point, but I urge us to look for >>> other areas where we can get to CIF2 by building on work that is >>> already done. >>> >>> This is not a good time for wheel-reinvention. >>> >>> I would appreciate knowing from those who wish to reinvent this >>> particular wheel, why they wish to do that and from where they >>> expect to get the resources to do it? >>> >>> Regards, >>> Herbert >>> >>> ===================================================== >>> Herbert J. Bernstein, Professor of Computer Science >>> Dowling College, Kramer Science Center, KSC 121 >>> Idle Hour Blvd, Oakdale, NY, 11769 >>> >>> +1-631-244-3035 >>> <mailto:yaya@dowling.edu>yaya@dowling.edu >>> ===================================================== >>> >>> On Fri, 7 Jan 2011, Bollinger, John C wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> On Friday, January 07, 2011 3:14 PM, Herbert J. Bernstein wrote: >>>> >>>>> We seem not to be communicating effectively. >>> >> >>>>> What I am asking for is an _existing_, supported treble quote specification >>>>> from an _existing_ language with _existing_ documentation and >>>>> _existing_ software as an alternative to the Python specification, >>>>> documentation and software to which we all have access, that is being >>>>> proposed as an alternative >>>>> to what Ralf has proposed. >>>> >>>> Thank you for that clarification. You are right, I didn't understand >>>> what you were asking for. >>>> >>>> I hope this will likewise clarify my position: I reject the premise that >>>> the system we choose must meet those criteria, and I oppose adopting the >>>> full Python syntax and semantics. >>>> >>>>> The Python specification is available at >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> <http://docs.python.org/reference/index.html>http://docs.python.org/reference/index.html >>>>> >>>>> with the lexical analysis at >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> <http://docs.python.org/reference/lexical_analysis.html>http://docs.python.org/reference/lexical_analysis.html >>>> >>>> Thanks, though that is exactly what I was looking at already. It leaves >>>> several details unclear, some of which I discussed in previous messages. >>>> Hence, I consider it slightly short of a *full* specification. It does, >>>> however, provide my grounds for opposing adoption of that scheme for >>>> CIF. >>>> >>>>> The complete source code and binaries are available at: >>>> >>>> Unless you propose to append a particular set of Python sources to the >>>> CIF specification as a reference, I have no interest in perusing the >>>> source code to seek answers to such questions of detail as I have. >>>> Furthermore, I would oppose adding such an appendix on the grounds that >>>> it would be exceedingly difficult to use to resolve questions such as >>>> mine. >>>> >>>> I am likewise unwilling to rely on the behavior the python binary that >>>> happens to be installed on my computer to answer them. If the correct >>>> behavior is not documented independent of the program then there is no >>>> particular reason to trust that it won't change in future versions, or >>>> that any particular implementation is correct or bug-free. >>>> >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> John >>>> >>>> -- >>>> John C. Bollinger, Ph.D. >>>> Department of Structural Biology >>>> St. Jude Children's Research Hospital >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Email Disclaimer: >>>> <http://www.stjude.org/emaildisclaimer>www.stjude.org/emaildisclaimer >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> ddlm-group mailing list >>>> <mailto:ddlm-group@iucr.org>ddlm-group@iucr.org >>>> >>>> <http://scripts.iucr.org/mailman/listinfo/ddlm-group>http://scripts.iucr.org/mailman/listinfo/ddlm-group >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> ddlm-group mailing list >>> <mailto:ddlm-group@iucr.org>ddlm-group@iucr.org >>> <http://scripts.iucr.org/mailman/listinfo/ddlm-group>http://scripts.iucr.org/mailman/listinfo/ddlm-group >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> ddlm-group mailing list >>> ddlm-group@iucr.org >>> http://scripts.iucr.org/mailman/listinfo/ddlm-group >> >> >> -- >> ===================================================== >> 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 >> ===================================================== >> _______________________________________________ >> ddlm-group mailing list >> ddlm-group@iucr.org >> http://scripts.iucr.org/mailman/listinfo/ddlm-group >> > > > > -- > T +61 (02) 9717 9907 > F +61 (02) 9717 3145 > M +61 (04) 0249 4148 > _______________________________________________ > 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]
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [ddlm-group] Eliding in triple-quoted strings: Proposals C andD. .. .. . (Herbert J. Bernstein)
- References:
- [ddlm-group] Eliding in triple-quoted strings: Proposals C and D (James Hester)
- Re: [ddlm-group] Eliding in triple-quoted strings: Proposals C and D (SIMON WESTRIP)
- Re: [ddlm-group] Eliding in triple-quoted strings: Proposals C and D (Herbert J. Bernstein)
- Re: [ddlm-group] Eliding in triple-quoted strings: Proposals C and D (John Westbrook)
- Re: [ddlm-group] Eliding in triple-quoted strings: Proposals C andD. .. .. . (Herbert J. Bernstein)
- Re: [ddlm-group] Eliding in triple-quoted strings: Proposals C andD. .. .. . (SIMON WESTRIP)
- Re: [ddlm-group] Eliding in triple-quoted strings: Proposals C andD. .. .. . (James Hester)
- Prev by Date: Re: [ddlm-group] Eliding in triple-quoted strings: Proposals C andD. .. .. .
- Next by Date: Re: [ddlm-group] Eliding in triple-quoted strings: Proposals C andD. .. .. .
- Prev by thread: Re: [ddlm-group] Eliding in triple-quoted strings: Proposals C andD. .. .. .
- Next by thread: Re: [ddlm-group] Eliding in triple-quoted strings: Proposals C andD. .. .. .
- Index(es):