Re: unhead
Randal L. Schwartz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: perl -ne 'print unless 1..5' perl -pe '$_ x=!(1..5)' -- Keith C. Ivey [EMAIL PROTECTED] Washington, DC
Re: unhead
Randal L. Schwartz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Keith perl -pe '$_ x=!(1..5)' FWP. Not Golf. :) Well, I'm sure there's something better than that for golf (Ton probably has a 3-byte solution), but I think x= with a boolean righthand side *is* fun, and it's even handy for one-liners occasionally once you've gotten used to it. -- Keith C. Ivey [EMAIL PROTECTED] Washington, DC
Re: Load-Bearing Warnings
Bart Lateur [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not fun but... Use local $^W; near where the bulk of the warnings are coming from, assuming it's safe to be ignored, maybe just these lines in their own block. Or just initialize the variables and avoid the warnings. Still not fun, though. -- Keith C. Ivey [EMAIL PROTECTED] Washington, DC
Re: Is this fun?
A. Pagaltzis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: More than those you mention - because it doesn't parse HTML, just looks for some string bits. It will blow up on img alt=a r g h ... True, but in the real world (or at least that part of it I experience), you're more likely to run into something like img src=http://www.example.com/images/abcd.gif which will be handled by the regex but may cause a parser to blow up (though some are more tolerant than others). It's sad that such code exists, it's sad that browsers tolerate it without complaint, but we have to deal with it. Unfortunately, stuff on pages encountered in the wild often isn't valid HTML -- in fact that was the whole point of the exercise here. Valid HTML would have had the closing tags already. And the stuff being produced isn't valid HTML either, since the tags may be misnested. Sometimes parsing is overkill. If regexes are good enough for Tim Bray, they're good enough for me: | That leaves input data munging, which I do a lot of, and a | lot of input data these days is XML. Now here's the dirty | secret; most of it is machine-generated XML, and in most | cases, I use the perl regexp engine to read and process | it. I've even gone to the length of writing a prefilter to | glue together tags that got split across multiple lines, | just so I could do the regexp trick. http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2003/03/16/XML-Prog -- Keith C. Ivey [EMAIL PROTECTED] Washington, DC
Re: Is this fun?
Jon Bjornstad [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I had a fragment of HTML that I needed to search
for imbalanced tags and then remedy the
situation by appending the right number of closing tags.
my ($no, $nc);
for my $t (qw(ol ul b i u a)) {
$no = $frag =~ s/$t\b/$t/gi;
$nc = $frag =~ s#/$t\b#/$t#gi;
$frag .= /$t x ($no-$nc) if $no $nc;
}
How about that last line? :)
I don't often get to use the '.' operator or the 'x' operator
and I thought this was pretty cool.
You don't often use the . operator? No step-by-step
construction of strings? You *are* missing out on fun -- or
maybe now.
Anyway, here's a very similar bit from a program I wrote some
months back:
# Close unclosed tags:
for my $tag ( 'FONT', 'B' ) {
my $uc_desc = uc($description);
my($opens, $closes) = (0, 0);
$opens++ while $uc_desc =~ m{$tag}g;
$closes++ while $uc_desc =~ m{/$tag}g;
$description .= /$tag x ( $opens - $closes )
if $opens $closes;
}
I can't remember why I made an uppercase copy rather than
using the /i modifier. I'm sure I had some reason. As to why
I made the copy inside the loop, that seems to have been just
an oversight. I didn't use \b in the matches, but FONT and B
were really the only HTML tags that occurred in the fragments
I was dealing with.
--
Keith C. Ivey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Washington, DC
Re: Converting a textfile-like string to an array and back
Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Only if you say $x eq means no lines instead of one empty line missing its \n :) Well, the subject line does say textfile-like, and a 0-byte text file has no lines, not one empty line. -- Keith C. Ivey [EMAIL PROTECTED] Washington, DC
Re: Perl Challenges, Anywhere?
WC -Sx- Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Given: fcjjf1CkQsV1IFCCJ25145245 Can you devise a way to break the code? Clearly the encryption is a simple xor with \x2c\x16\x19\x1e\x46\x50\x2d\x04\x25\x1b\x33\x43 . \x69\x16\x26\x31\x26\x12\x5d\x50\x57\x5e\x57\x46\x19. -- Keith C. Ivey [EMAIL PROTECTED] Washington, DC
Re: Thirty Two Camels
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You can further combine the above options, each combination producing a different camel, for example: perl camel.pl uri which produces a large, bearded camel with a ponytail, glasses, and a tie-dyed T-shirt. -- Keith C. Ivey [EMAIL PROTECTED] Washington, DC
Re: Teams?
Stephen Turner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No, sorry, I misdirected my reply because of (i) lack of Reply-To on the golf mailing list and (ii) temporary brain error. Argh! I was wondering why there was so little golf discussion on either golf list. I seem to have been dropped from [EMAIL PROTECTED] a week or so ago. -- Keith C. Ivey [EMAIL PROTECTED] Washington, DC
Re: regex for html img... tags
Greg Bacon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I coined the phrase Perl golf, but the flood of golf threads have made golf really, really boring. And what better name for something really, really boring than golf (apologies to fans of non-Perl golf)? IMHO, the volume of golf traffic on fwp warrants the creation of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sounds reasonable, although I'd hope it wouldn't cause too much withering of FWP. -- Keith C. Ivey [EMAIL PROTECTED] Washington, DC
Re: TPR1 post-mortem
Marcelo E. Magallon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A question of my own: why doesn't s/\B.\B/$$/g work as I expect, namely abcd - abbccd. I really can't figure it out by reading the docs. I wondered that too. I figured it was because \B wouldn't match twice at the same place, but then I saw that s/\B./$$/g didn't work as expected either. -- Keith C. Ivey [EMAIL PROTECTED] Washington, DC
Re: TPR(0,1) scores
Stephen Turner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Funny, I thought I'd had several epiphanies, and yet I'm still a stroke behind you... I apologize for my unseemly whining. I've been punished for it by being dropped from 7th to 11th place overnight. -- Keith C. Ivey [EMAIL PROTECTED] Washington, DC
Re: TPR(0,1) scores
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Unfortunately, I have been reduced to hanging on to Keith and Stephen like a leech. :-( Looks like the leech has detached itself. You've shot up to second place, 5 strokes ahead of me. I don't seem to be getting the epiphany yet, so I guess I've got a few days of obsession to go. -- Keith C. Ivey [EMAIL PROTECTED] Washington, DC
Re: TPR(0,1) scores
Stephen Turner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Fun-with-English question: Is a 'sandtrap' the normal US word for what we over here call a 'bunker'? Is 'bunker' also used? Both are listed (sand trap is spelled with a space) in Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary and in The American Heritage Dictionary (3rd ed.). There's no indication of a preference for either, and no indication that bunker is in any way un-American. My only UK dictionary is the compact OED. It lists bunker but not sand trap, and it says that bunker is Scottish. But then that part of the dictionary was written in the 1880s. -- Keith C. Ivey [EMAIL PROTECTED] Washington, DC
Re: TPR(0,1) scores
Jonathan E. Paton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Are you surprised bunker is a Scottish word? Since we Scots invented golf, I guess we were entitled to attach our words to the game. I'm not surprised that it was originally Scottish. I was a little surprised that the OED considered the word (not just its origin) Scottish, since there was no indication of what the corresponding term would be in the English of England. But perhaps English people didn't talk about golf in the 1880s. -- Keith C. Ivey [EMAIL PROTECTED] Washington, DC
Re: Fwd: Re: interesting typo I couldn't see
Rick Klement [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I write it this way (corrected) (with tabs and TS=2 in vim):
if (...)
{
my @item_parts = split(/\n/, $item);
printf ORDER (\n%4d %-50s %3.2f %3.2f\n,
$quantity, $item_parts[0], $price, $ext);
}
else
{
printf ORDER (\n%4d %-50s %3.2f %3.2f\n,
$quantity, $item, $price, $ext);
}
It makes the problem obvious... :)
Well, what I said was true. I wasn't familiar with that style.
Perhaps I've led a sheltered life. I guess you're right that
it avoids the problem, as long as you never have more than one
tab level of indenting for the second line of a statement. But
then if you never have a greatly indented second line (and thus
never worry about lining things up), the problem won't be very
likely regardless of your indenting style.
Since I have never encountered the problem and am quite happy
with my own, standard indenting style, I see no reason to
change. But we're venturing into unfun territory.
--
Keith C. Ivey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Washington, DC
Re: TPR0: the leaderboard...
Jerome Quelin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I remember you the fixed rules: - Number is to be taken as first arg of the script. - You can assume input as [0-9A-Z] (ie, no lowercase). ASCII? Or do the solutions have to work for EBCDIC as well? -- Keith C. Ivey [EMAIL PROTECTED] Washington, DC
RE: Golf and the Perl Review
Patrick Gaskill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As an aside, I'd say that in general I think of math problem
golf holes as functions, and text mangling holes as
file-suckers. At least it's something to consider for those who
may be working on Games::Golf. :)
How are functions scored? The number of characters between the
{ and the }?
--
Keith C. Ivey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Washington, DC
Re: Golf and the Perl Review
Ton Hospel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: mm, assuming a filter of lower case ascii input, nothing allowed to stderr, my first attempt is 44 I think. I don't think lowercase is a safe assumption. The contest said Convert a base 36 number, with the digits [0-9A-Z], to its base 10 representation -- Keith C. Ivey [EMAIL PROTECTED] Washington, DC -- Keith C. Ivey [EMAIL PROTECTED] Washington, DC
Re: even.pl solutions
Stephen Turner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -n $==$.1;$=^=7 ...y*yuoeia***ord for/./g;$=||print50 ivey This one looks interesting, but I can't make it work. Is there a typo? Yes, we've run into this before. Some mail program along the way added a dot at the beginning of the second line, and then did it again in your message. There should be only one dot there. -- Keith C. Ivey [EMAIL PROTECTED] Washington, DC
Re: Golf challenge: decode CETI message
Ilmari Karonen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Besides, aren't single quotes special for s/// and y/// anyway? I think what Keith _really_ meant was tr[\0\xff][ @] or equivalent. No, I was intending for the operation to be performed on the program Patrick had suggested (or my revision), not on the input file (which doesn't contain any \x00 or \xff). So unless I'm missing something q(s'\x0\xff' @') was indeed what I meant, special meaning of single quotes and all. That is, I wanted to change the part of the program that said q(tr,01\n,\x0\xff,d;) to q(tr,01\n, @,d;). I have no explanation for my not changing 'tr' to 'y' (or for that matter not removing the 'x' in '\x0'). I hang my head in shame. -- Keith C. Ivey [EMAIL PROTECTED] Washington, DC
Re: Golf challenge: decode CETI message
Patrick Gaskill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My attempt, at 79 characters:
$\=$/;undef$/;$_=;s/.{70}//s;tr,01\n,\x00\xff,d;
print$1while/(.{1,127})\n?/g;
Are we doing this without command-line switches? This should
do the same in 65 characters:
$\=$,=$/;$/=x;$_=;s/.{70}//s;tr,01\n,\x0\xff,d;print/.{1,127}/g
But s'\x0\xff' @' to make it shorter and more visible on my system.
--
Keith C. Ivey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Washington, DC
Re: Interactive golf hole
Wesley Darlington [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -p s/\s*(([^]*)|((\S*?)#.*)|(\S+))\s*/$2$4$5:/g,s/:+$/\n/ Is the third set of parens necessary? Won't this do the same? -p s/\s*(([^]*)|(\S*?)#.*|(\S+))\s*/$2$3$4:/g,s/:+$/\n/ And from there you can cut it further to -p s/\s*(([^]*)|(\S*?)#.*|(\S+))\s*/$+:/g,s/:+$/\n/ It still has the problems with trailing null fields and xx. -- Keith C. Ivey [EMAIL PROTECTED] Washington, DC
Re: Santa Hole 5 (wc.pl) Post Mortem
--- Keith C Ivey - 22
#! /usr/bin/perl -lp
}{$_=7e10+$.,s$.$$
Looks like I was the only one who didn't use printf on this
hole (other than Piers, but using $# is similar), and I was
only one stroke short of the winners.
I'm surprised no one submitted anything with 0 x10, but I
guess those always end up too long.
--
Keith C. Ivey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Washington, DC
Re: middle line (was Re: Daily Perl FAQ...)
Greg Bacon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You have a finite sequence of unknown length, where each element in the sequence is a string. Output the middle element of the sequence (for a reasonable definition of middle), traversing the sequence at most once and without storing the elements in an array. Okay, you've clarified what the input is like. Now we need clarification of what without storing the elements in an array means. Does the elements mean all the elements or any elements? Does an array mean you can store whatever elements you want, as long as you don't use a Perl array to do it? -- Keith C. Ivey [EMAIL PROTECTED] Washington, DC
Re: 'vacation'
Scott R. Godin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm particularly interested in 'screening' the bulk-mail type messages that list me in their bcc: header so that my address does not show up in the from: or cc: address listings, You're lucky that so much of your spam would be blocked by such a filter. A lot of the spam I get nowadays actually has my address in the To: line. Sometimes it's even disguised as a bounce message. Ideally, it should return the offending mail to postmaster@* (where * is the supposed 'from' address) to report the abuse, and include a full copy of the original message including headers (along with a nice terse little message regarding the laws involved). Be very careful with any solution you implement. For the vast majority of spam, the From: address has nothing to do with the real sender or any open relay used. Complaining to the postmaster there just annoys a completely innocent person who's no doubt getting quite enough complaints from ignorant victims of the spammer. -- Keith C. Ivey [EMAIL PROTECTED] Washington, DC
Re: First CPAN Joke Module
Michael G Schwern [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here is an early reference (sorry for the awful URL) http://groups.google.com/groups?th=d8f2e19fb2209276seekm=MERLYN .95Apr4083526%40linda.teleport.comframe=off No need for the awfulness. Google URLs for threads work just fine with just the 'th' parameter: http://groups.google.com/groups?th=d8f2e19fb2209276 -- Keith C. Ivey [EMAIL PROTECTED] Washington, DC
Re: isprint Golf Challenge
David Wheeler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Now, this seemed rather silly to me. I couldn't imagine that it was efficient, and I generally like to look for reasons to lose POSIX and its bloat. This is what I came up with: $str =~ s/([^ -~])/'\\' . sprintf(%03o, ord($1))/ge; If you're serious about submitting a patch, you might note that perlre says Note also that the whole range idea is rather unportable between character sets--and even within character sets they may cause results you probably didn't expect. A sound principle is to use only ranges that begin from and end at either alphabets of equal case ([a-e], [A-E]), or digits ([0-9]). Anything else is unsafe. If in doubt, spell out the character sets in full. Your character class works only in ASCII. So for correctness it's better to use the POSIX character class syntax. The character class for nonprintable characters can be written as either [[:^print:]] or [^[:print:]] (see perlre). Unfortunately, it seems that that syntax requires Perl 5.6.1, so it might not be the most friendly thing to use in a module. I assume that's why the authors went with POSIX.pm. If you're interested only in golf, and don't care about those issues, you can eliminate several bytes easily: $str=~s/[^ -~]/sprintf'\%03o',ord$/ge; -- Keith C. Ivey [EMAIL PROTECTED] Washington, DC
Re: isprint Golf Challenge
Michael G Schwern [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hmmm, there seems to be a little problem: $ perl -wle 'print \n =~ /[[:cntrl:]]/ ? Yep : Nope' Yep $ perl -wle 'print \n =~ /[[:print:]]/ ? Yep : Nope' Yep $ perl -Mutf8 -wle 'print \n =~ /[[:print:]]/ ? Yep : Nope' Nope I missed that when I was testing. There's the same problem with \t, \f, and \r (ASCII 9, 12, and 13). Perl seems to think that anything that matches \s is printable, rather than just space. -- Keith C. Ivey [EMAIL PROTECTED] Washington, DC
Re: Practical Perl Golf
Uri Guttman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: #ifbar should be filtered out but isn't. you can only pass lines which start with exact cpp command tokens But shouldn't we be filtering out lines like these? #if.bar #undef-foo And for that matter this, and numerous other lines that don't match the syntax of cpp commands? #define If we're not cheating at all, the program has to be a LOT longer. -- Keith C. Ivey [EMAIL PROTECTED] Washington, DC
Re: Practical Perl Golf
Michael G Schwern [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: perl -ne $saw_bang++ if /^#!.*(perl|PERL)/; print if $saw_bang (!/^\s*#/ || /^\s*#\s*(include|define|if|ifdef|ifndef|else|elif|undef|endif)/) your_file How about this? perl -pe$_=''if 1../^#!.*perl/i;/^\s*#\s*(include|define|if(n?def)?|el(se|if)|undef|endif)/||s/^\s*#.*//s Still too long (107 characters), and I cheated on the /^#!.*(perl|PERL)/ part -- but then I think you're already cheating by not checking what follows the preprocessor keywords. Anyway, the scalar range operator is the real contribution. I'm sure further improvement is possible. -- Keith C. Ivey [EMAIL PROTECTED] Washington, DC
Re: Practical Perl Golf
Michael G Schwern [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Schuyler's got it down to: perl -ne '(/^\\s*[^#]|^\\s*#\\s*(include|define|(ifn?|un)def|else|elif|endif)/)print' That leaves comment lines when there's whitespace before the #. And why the parens around the regex? -- Keith C. Ivey [EMAIL PROTECTED] Washington, DC
