> Yet they are languages according to formal language theory, a definition which I’d say is a bit more widespread than yours. Indeed what you propose roughly maps to (a subset of) context-sensitive languages in particular.
I love when people talk down to me as if I don't have a PhD in this shit lol. No actually what I'm talking about is Recursive languages.
> Then regex, HTML, YAML, and so on are not languages either according to your definition.
Do you see the M before the L there in both HTML and YAML? Do you know what it stands for? Markup. Markup is a funny word that colloquially means the same thing as annotate which bears a strong relationship to the word notation hmmmmmmmm.
Let me put it simply: if the force of the original comment is that context free languages can be 2d then I would say..... no duh.
I love when people talk down to me as if I don't have a PhD in this shit lol. No actually what I'm talking about is Recursive languages.
> Then regex, HTML, YAML, and so on are not languages either according to your definition.
Do you see the M before the L there in both HTML and YAML? Do you know what it stands for? Markup. Markup is a funny word that colloquially means the same thing as annotate which bears a strong relationship to the word notation hmmmmmmmm.
Let me put it simply: if the force of the original comment is that context free languages can be 2d then I would say..... no duh.