On 15-Dec-01, Petr Krenzelok wrote: > Hi, > Carl used parse without any need to define a rule, e.g. parse > some-string none will give you a block of strings separated by space
I planned to use a rule at the start, but then noticed that just a check of length would do the trick. But then Joel changed the rules... (; > But why not to use rule? Because of having everything on one line? > OK, with rebol - it is pretty legal to have whole script on one line > (if you don't use comments of course :-), so: > digits: charset "0123456789" spacer: #"-" > tel-num: [3 digits spacer some [digits | spacer]] parse/all text > [some [start: tel-num end: (print copy/part start end) | skip]] > 555-1212 > 800-555-1111 > 123-4576 > 987-6543 > 111-1111 > == true > I know that tel-num rule allows for some 999------, but that is > sufficient for our demo ... Just put on one line, shorten word > names, and replace rebol code in parens to get your result ... > If someone finds easier solution (e.g. iteration based) for my > string replacement, cool then :-) > hide-it: func [s e][ l: length? copy/part s e remove/part s e > insert/dup s "#" l) > parse/all text [some [start: tel-num end: (hide-it) | skip]] > ; <----- clear and readable, isn't it? :-) The height of clarity - but it doesn't work. (: The hide-it func ends in a ")" not a "]" and where it's used in the parse line the 's and 'e parameters aren't given. I take it you didn't test it? (: But never mind. When fixed it works, unlike what I was doing till I read your post... > Well, on the other hand > not so straightforward as your Perl example ... Perhaps Joel would now like to write a version in Perl that's designed to be as clear as possible as apposed to as short as possible? > Cheers, > -pekr- -- Carl Read -- To unsubscribe from this list, please send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" in the subject, without the quotes.
