Re : ChandO-ware

Krishna Kondaka (KKONDAKA@us.oracle.com)
17 Nov 95 10:44:45 -0800


I thank Syaamala rao gaaru and raamakRshNa gaaru for pointing out the some of
the anamolies (or special cases, in computer terminology) in identifying
laghuvu, guruvu maatralu in a padyam. Also I agree with raamakRshNa gari
comments about suresh's program. I am sorry if I gave any immpression, in my
last mail, that his program is complete and totally fool-proof.
He is aware that his program does not take of most of the special cases and
not complete but I think he has not modified his program to take care of all
those things because he does not have any users who would use that to its
fullest extent. I think he can easily extend it if needed.
I guess I have already spoken too much on be-half of him. So I leave rest to
him.

I believe that the program can be completely fool-proof if the rules to
identify a particular type of padyam are fixed, no matter how much context
sensitve they are. The program may become very big and complex but can be done.

My(not suresh's) answer to prasad chODavarapu :
I believe that the program should only help you in correcting the
gaNaalu to make a particular padyam of a certain type. I think you should a
padyam first and put it through the program to look at the gaNas and you
should probably try to correct the gaNas that deviate from making that
particular line from a particular type. Also writing a padyam like "kandam"
should be easier than writing a vRtta padyam like utpalamaala because you have
more flexibilty there. My two cent worth.

kRshna konDaka