[DFDL-WG] questions

[Sampo Syreeni]

On 2014-04-29, Bing Lu wrote:

> Also I were to parse the DFDL using IBM DFDL code, is there a setting 
> that I can call to do partial parsing? And when parsing happens, does 
> it stop on the first parsing error or it tries to parse as much as 
> possible to include all the errors encountered?

I too would like to see both the proper upper and lower parsing 
complexity of the language proven. Not asymptotically, but over the 
minor oh. After that, I'd really like to see the best known constants as 
of last week, and the whole rationale why the language took this 
precise, hypermicromanaged route where you have to ask about the 
existence of a formal grammar in the first place.

Seriously, I've pretty much been unemployed for two years after you 
already did two years of hard work. I'm still not seeing the promise 
even in IBM's code. What is this, another SGML?!? When is this thing 
going to parse my favourite, random format, out of the box?
-- 
Sampo Syreeni, aka decoy - decoy at iki.fi, http://decoy.iki.fi/front
+358-40-3255353, 025E D175 ABE5 027C 9494 EEB0 E090 8BA9 0509 85C2