Friend of mine: why are you always so grammar nazi-ish?
Me: well, it's in my job name...
Friend: ?!?
Me: pro-grammer :P
(Yes, I know that word isn't gramatically correct!)

When people mess with AI

I can't be the only one who's thinking it

I've tried to stay out of the fray regarding replacing long-standing terminology to use "safe" inclusive wording instead because it doesn't seem like that big of a deal to me to just use the new wording. If the old wording wasn't hurting people (this is an argument that a of a lot of people use regarding this mass naming change movement) then the new wording shouldn't hurt anyone either...

that was just my 2 cents on the topic, until today!

Some dumb motherfuckers are trying to replace the word 'execute' with 'start'/'run'.

That's just some fucking ignorant plebian shit right there. The literal definition of execute is:

"The act or process to carry out fully or put completely into effect"

"to do what is provided or required by..."

"to perform what is required to give validity to..."

start and run don't grammatically encapsulate what execute does. And now I sound like a fucking grammar nazi because this shit is getting under my skin more than it should.

Execute's primary definition is grammatically correct for the context in which it is used.

Change Master/Slave for databases and I couldn't give a single solitary fuck about it. Primary/Secondary works just fine too. The grammatical context isn't blown away here.

But take away my execute and sudden I get all hot and bothered with the desire to punch a nun over how stupid this "offensive words" crusade is.

Thank you for coming to my Ted talk.

me: having an important question requiring urgent answer
some grammar nazi StackOverflow:

A request:

"Hello, John! How are you today? Listen, if you have 15 minutes today - could you please do something for me? I need you to compare the results of test runs 1111 and 2222. Thank you!"

- How normal people read it:
* reads every word*
a grammar nazi takes a few minutes to look up whether the dash was the right symbol to use in this context.
appreciates the politeness
appreciates the personal touch (John, How are you)

- How a programmer reads it
".*compare\s.*(test|run).*\s(\\d{2,}).*\s(\\d{2,})\s*.*"

I would post this post as a joke/meme if it were one. Unfortunately, this is usually the case and devs, like regexes, sometimes tend to miss some important detail in the .* part.

I know it a strange thing to ask but I need help with English grammar ( I am not a English native)

I am doing an assignment on context free grammar program.

What the program need to do it "Produce a grammar tree based on the rule"

For example a sentence "Jame sat.", It will need to produce a grammar tree like this.

S
_____|___
NP VP
| |
N V
| |
holmes sat

The only thing I need to do it give a grammar rule to the program like this

S -> NP VP
NP -> N | Det N
VP -> V | NP

What the above rule said is that the sentence is composed of Noun Phrase and Verb Phrase and Noun Phrase is either is a Noun or a determiner and Noun.

Now here is the meat of the question.

I am having trouble parsing a grammar tree for this sentence "She never said a word until we were at the door here"

I have provided my grammar rule below. I think I forget to add some grammar rule or some of my grammar rule are incorrect. I am not a native English speaker so I am having trouble on it.

The search engine have fail me (I have look up various grammar tree) so I am asking for help on devrant. Grammar nazi are warmly welcome :)

S -> NP VP | S Conj VP | S Conj S

NP -> N | Det NP | N PP | Adj N | Det Adj N | Det N

PP | Det NOM | Det N PP

VP -> V | V NP | V NP PP | V PP | V NP PP Adv

VP -> Adv V NP | VP PP | VP AVP | V PP PP | V
ADJP

PP -> P NP

AVP -> Adv | Adv Adj | Adv AVP

NOM -> Adj Adj N | Adj N | Adj NP

ADJP -> Adj | Adj PP

**I am not sure about these two clause below**
VP -> V | Adv
NP -> Adj Adj N