Talk:Execute a Markov algorithm: Difference between revisions

m
→‎Rules re-write needed: added an editing comment.
No edit summary
m (→‎Rules re-write needed: added an editing comment.)
Line 4:
:I put it in Extended BNF notation which is more precise than the format in the WP article, and it is a standard for representing grammars. There's only two main differences: the WP version has quotes, which aren't really necessary; and this one allows for comments using #. --[[User:Rob.s.brit|Rob.s.brit]] 16:21, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
: (I originally wrote this early this morning, but I didn't notice an edit conflict with the J talk addition before I went to work.) While EBNF is pretty common (and interesting on its own), I can't help but wonder if the parsing of the Markov rules should be distinct pieces of funtionality. I.e. some [[Parse EBNF]], and a [[Execute Markov Algorithm]]. The particulars of parsing EBNF seem irrelevant to Markov chains themselves. While there are broad tasks on RC (such as [[RCRPG]] and a few interpreters), they're usually not created until after the individual concepts have places elsewhere. --[[User:Short Circuit|Michael Mol]] 08:17, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
 
:: I also changed the '''rulesets'''   (from the existing faux language entries)   into (bold) section headers into the (true) task preamble.   This fixed the "dual" numbering that was in effect, and also placed the TOC (table of contents) into the correct location.   -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 04:41, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
 
==J==