Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On Thursday 07 November 2002 4:51 pm, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| > Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| > | Perfect. Shame boost isn't as clever as sed.
| >
| > Actually it seems that boost is not far behind:
| >
| > string litex(".|*?+(){}[
On Thursday 07 November 2002 4:51 pm, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> | Perfect. Shame boost isn't as clever as sed.
>
> Actually it seems that boost is not far behind:
>
> string litex(".|*?+(){}[]^$\\");
> string fmt("$&");
> boost::R
Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Perfect. Shame boost isn't as clever as sed.
Actually it seems that boost is not far behind:
string litex(".|*?+(){}[]^$\\");
string fmt("$&");
boost::RegEx reg("[].|*?+(){}\\[^$]");
string res = reg.Merge(litex,
On Thursday 07 November 2002 1:59 pm, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> | On Wednesday 06 November 2002 4:24 pm, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> >> On Wed, Nov 06, 2002 at 04:06:15PM +, Angus Leeming wrote:
> >> > The whole point of this exercise was to clean-up th
Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On Wednesday 06 November 2002 4:24 pm, Andre Poenitz wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 06, 2002 at 04:06:15PM +, Angus Leeming wrote:
>> > The whole point of this exercise was to clean-up the code in biblio.C. As
>> > a side effect, boost::regex searching now wo
On Thu, Nov 07, 2002 at 12:52:56PM +, Angus Leeming wrote:
> Ok to apply?
Well. Looks ok, so if it works...
Andre'
--
Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security,
will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)
On Wednesday 06 November 2002 4:24 pm, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 06, 2002 at 04:06:15PM +, Angus Leeming wrote:
> > The whole point of this exercise was to clean-up the code in biblio.C. As
> > a side effect, boost::regex searching now works in the same way as 1.2.
>
> 95 lines added,
On Thursday 07 November 2002 10:49 am, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 07, 2002 at 10:53:01AM +, Angus Leeming wrote:
> > Why didn't I mention it before? I forgot!
>
> In any case, I wouldn't care. You can quote me later on:
>
> "Nobody ever will search for simple strings like '[^]'"
;-)
On Thu, Nov 07, 2002 at 10:53:01AM +, Angus Leeming wrote:
> Why didn't I mention it before? I forgot!
In any case, I wouldn't care. You can quote me later on:
"Nobody ever will search for simple strings like '[^]'"
Andre'
--
Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security
On Thursday 07 November 2002 10:44 am, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> | Actually, I was hoping you'd just volunteer ;-)
> already did it...
Good man!
> #include
> #include
> #include
>
> using namespace std;
>
> int main()
> {
> string litex(".|*?+(){}[]^$\\");
> string fmt("$&")
Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On Thursday 07 November 2002 10:15 am, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
>> Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> | Reading the boost::regex docs:
>> |// All characters are literals except: .|*?+(){}[]^$\
>> |// These characters are literals when
On Thursday 07 November 2002 10:15 am, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> | Reading the boost::regex docs:
> | // All characters are literals except: .|*?+(){}[]^$\
> | // These characters are literals when preceded by a "\".
> |
> | This sed expression
> "Andre" == Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Andre> On Thu, Nov 07, 2002 at 10:38:44AM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
Andre> wrote:
>> Let's admit it, even for people who like to use regexps, most of
>> the time searches in bibliography do not require them. This is just
>> a nifty gadge
On Thu, Nov 07, 2002 at 10:38:44AM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Let's admit it, even for people who like to use regexps, most of the
> time searches in bibliography do not require them. This is just a
> nifty gadget.
Sure. But implementing both separately is overkill if one can be done by
Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Reading the boost::regex docs:
| // All characters are literals except: .|*?+(){}[]^$\
| // These characters are literals when preceded by a "\".
>
| This sed expression works:
>
| aleem-> search_expr='. | * ? + ( ) { } [ ] ^ $ \'
| aleem-> e
On Thursday 07 November 2002 9:38 am, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > "Lars" == Lars Gullik Bjønnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Lars> We used to have code in the xfroms FileDialog that made a bit
> Lars> simpler for beginners, in that it allowed simple glob patterns
> Lars> as well.
>
> Lar
On Thu, Nov 07, 2002 at 10:18:50AM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Angus> Yes. Good point. I'll investigate further.
>
> Yes, but regex can be confusing, especially if people want to use
> things like ".", "[" and don't want to know why this does not work.
> Believe, me, regex are really real
> "Lars" == Lars Gullik Bjønnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Lars> We used to have code in the xfroms FileDialog that made a bit
Lars> simpler for beginners, in that it allowed simple glob patterns
Lars> as well.
Lars> Typically we just rewrote "*" -> ".*" and "." -> "\."
Lars> I don't agree
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| > "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
|
| >> Is it necessary to have the simple/regex distinction at all? regex
| >> alone should be sufficient, shouldn't it?
|
| Angus> Yes. Good point. I'll investigate further.
|
| Yes, b
> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Is it necessary to have the simple/regex distinction at all? regex
>> alone should be sufficient, shouldn't it?
Angus> Yes. Good point. I'll investigate further.
Yes, but regex can be confusing, especially if people want to use
things
On Wed, Nov 06, 2002 at 06:36:16PM +, Angus Leeming wrote:
> > > The whole point of this exercise was to clean-up the code in biblio.C. As
> > > a side effect, boost::regex searching now works in the same way as 1.2.
> >
> > 95 lines added, 71 removed... I'd like the other way round better...
>
Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Those are the (only) choices I'm giving you ;-) Which do you prefer?
neither
| Anyway, as André points out, this is all academic because the "simple" search
| is a subset of the regex. I'll just remove that option.
then that is the version I'll go fo
On Wednesday 06 November 2002 4:24 pm, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 06, 2002 at 04:06:15PM +, Angus Leeming wrote:
> > The whole point of this exercise was to clean-up the code in biblio.C. As
> > a side effect, boost::regex searching now works in the same way as 1.2.
>
> 95 lines added,
On Wednesday 06 November 2002 6:25 pm, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> | On Wednesday 06 November 2002 5:13 pm, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> >> use a switch:
> |
> | If I do that I get a (spurious) warning:
> |
> | cxx: Warning: ../../../../src/frontends/con
Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On Wednesday 06 November 2002 5:13 pm, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
>
>> use a switch:
| If I do that I get a (spurious) warning:
>
| cxx: Warning: ../../../../src/frontends/controllers/biblio.C, line 365: #117-D
| missing return statement at end
On Wednesday 06 November 2002 5:13 pm, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> use a switch:
If I do that I get a (spurious) warning:
cxx: Warning: ../../../../src/frontends/controllers/biblio.C, line 365: #117-D
missing return statement at end of non-void function
"biblio::searchKeys"
Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| The whole point of this exercise was to clean-up the code in biblio.C. As a
| side effect, boost::regex searching now works in the same way as 1.2.
>
| Ok to apply?
Ok, but I belive it could be further simplified.
| vector::const_iterator
| searchKe
On Wed, Nov 06, 2002 at 04:06:15PM +, Angus Leeming wrote:
> The whole point of this exercise was to clean-up the code in biblio.C. As a
> side effect, boost::regex searching now works in the same way as 1.2.
95 lines added, 71 removed... I'd like the other way round better...
Is it necessar
28 matches
Mail list logo
