Hi Petr,
I'm also interested in a good challenge - and I happen to be looking for an
opportunity to practive parse rules.
If you have the time, could you release (on or off list) a more detailed
specification for what you are trying to do? If parse can't handle it well,
I'd like to know that that is the case and what the limitation is in your
case.
TIA,
Elan >> [: - )]
At 11:23 PM 12/28/99 +0100, you wrote:
>
>
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> Hello [EMAIL PROTECTED]!
>>
>> On 27-Dic-99, you wrote:
>>
>> P> [thru "s" "om" skip " " "t" thru "t" " " "to" " " "p" skip
>> P> skip "se"]
>>
>> What about:
>>
>> [thru "som" skip " t" thru " to p" 2 skip "se"]
>
>Well, it doesn't solve my situation actually. The search string user
>enters can be something like "s?me", and you have to scan for the "s"
>occurance, followed by the rest of the rule - skip "me" " " etc.... The
>buil-rule function seems to work, seems to translate ? and * into right
>(almost, need to think about t*t case :-) sequences. The problem is
>really skip to "right" occurance of "s", to match the rule. I am now
>thinking about using some "ordinary" iteration, which should use 'find,
>to find "s", and then will try to apply the rule. I know the solution
>with rule | skip was also suggested here, but I think it will slow
>things a little bit ....
>
>Anyway, thanks for the help ...
>
>-pekr-
>
>> It shouldn't be a problem to build that.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Gabriele.
>> --
>> o--------------------) .-^-. (----------------------------------o
>> | Gabriele Santilli / /_/_\_\ \ Amiga Group Italia --- L'Aquila |
>> | GIESSE on IRC \ \-\_/-/ / http://www.amyresource.it/AGI/ |
>> o--------------------) `-v-' (----------------------------------o
>
>
>
