Strange Loops

No Matter Where You Go, There You Are

NBA Playoffs 2005

| Comments

The Sonics are back in the playoffs. I’ve watched them on and off throughout the year and they looked good. In the first round, they were impressive against the Kings. Against the Spurs going on right now, they’ve looked second rate. I’ve thought the threat would come from Timmy Duncan but Manu Ginobili has been the rock of that team. Manu just makes the rest of his team better with his cutting, slashing, shooting and competitive spirit. A Suns-Spurs conference final will be interesting with Ginobili matching up against Steve Nash. I think if the Sonics can contain him, we have a chance. We’re 2 - 0 down right now but if we can hold serve when the series comes back to Seattle we have a chance.

Whatever happens to the Sonics though, this appears to be a good playoff year. The first tier teams (Suns, Spurs, Heat and Pistons) look to be equally matched which always makes for exciting basketball.

A Good Read

| Comments

If you’re interested in the material. Chapters 1 - 4 can be easily read by someone with a CS background. Chapters 5 - 7 require more of a Physics background (they gave me the most difficulty). All through the book, Feynman displays his love of the subject and his approach of looking at problems from many different angles.

Also worth reading is his Nobel Prize Lecture. A little snippet from that lecture, taken completely out of context but still a beautiful paragraph.

That was the beginning, and the idea seemed so obvious to me and so elegant that I fell deeply in love with it. And, like falling in love with a woman, it is only possible if you do not know much about her, so you cannot see her faults. The faults will become apparent later, but after the love is strong enough to hold you to her. So, I was held to this theory, in spite of all difficulties, by my youthful enthusiasm.

A Little Grammer

| Comments

I spent the day playing around with ANTLR getting a little expression grammer working and trying to remember parsing theory from a very long time ago.

I modified the expression grammer found here to evaluate expressions like:
1 + 1
[1 + 1] + [3 + 3];

I haven’t got the unary negative/positive signs working yet but it doesn’t look too hard.

The square brackets are weird but I used them instead of the regular parenthesis ‘(’ ‘)’ because that was used by the generated code to delimit the abstract syntax tree.

Here’s the grammer I came up with.

expr      : sumExpr  END! ;sumExpr   : prodExpr ( (PLUS^ | MINUS^) prodExpr)* ; prodExpr  : powExpr ( (MUL^ | DIV^ | MOD^) powExpr)* ;powExpr   : atom (POW^ atom)? ;atom      : LPAREN^ sumExpr RPAREN! | INT;

I’ll leave it as an exercise to the reader to figure out what the lexical analysis part looked like.

Been a While

| Comments

I crashed and burned a couple of years back. My ego took a real bruising and I haven’t really recovered. It does seem to be a healthy choice for me to engage in rather than getting comfortable with a nice book. Maybe I’ll do more of it.