On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 06:25:53PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > I see nothing in your definition that is significantly different from > our attempts. It does feel more complex, mainly because you have much > more conditions, combining which in one's mind might not be easy at > first reading.
AFAICS, mine has exactly one condition (GREED) which is not explicitly contained in your approaches (AFAIR them). How can 1 be more than something? ;-) Note that the other approaches define a PROCESS (data depending on time — or on “scan” position in string). My definition is completely static — given a matching, it says whether it is good or not (without any recursion, or interdependence of conditions). Yours, Ilya _______________________________________________ Unicode mailing list Unicode@unicode.org http://unicode.org/mailman/listinfo/unicode