Title: RE: Precision Specifier
>I guess you are right. I will just have to do the caclulation to get the effect I want.
>BTW, I am having trouble applying the patch to the java file. It is a small file so could
> you plesae post the file or the patch instructions. I am using
Title: RE: Precision Specifier
James,
I
guess you are right. I will just have to do the caclulation to get the effect I
want. BTW, I am having trouble applying the patch to the java file. It is a
small file so could you plesae post the file or the patch instructions. I am
using Solaris 7
Title: RE: Precision Specifier
Joe,
>I think the number after the comma should be the number of subparts required.
>
>eg.
>a.b.c.d
>{-2,2} => b.c
>{2,2} => c.d
>{-0,1} => a
Thanks for the feedback. Still I would hesitate to go that route as it has l
Title: RE: Precision Specifier
>This is pretty neat stuff.
Thanks.
>Are you aware of Python splicing? See section 3.1.2 in > http://www.python.org/doc/tut/node5.html
No, I wasn't, but it appears to be a similiar idea. My notation is admitedly a little strang
James,
This is pretty neat stuff. Are you aware of Python splicing? See section 3.1.2 in
http://www.python.org/doc/tut/node5.html
The question on my mind is what do you do when the splice is out of bounds?
For string "a"
what is {2}, {-1}, {3,2}, {-3, -4}
What does {2, -4} mean?
BTW, tha
Title: RE: Precision Specifier
I
think the number after the comma should be the number of subparts
required.
eg.
a.b.c.d
{-2,2}
=> b.c
{2,2} => c.d
{-0,1}
=> a
I am
not so sure about using -0 as an index. Maybe the index should be 1 originated
giving {-1,1} =
Title: RE: Precision Specifier
I'd like to offer up a patch to PatternParser.java that changes the semantics of the precision modifier.
In particular, the current meaning is unchanged with new capabilities added. Semantics are now:
A positive integer indicates a substring starting
I want to create a new precision modifier such that, when given a category
such as "a.b.c" and paters of %c[2], gives "b" back. It would be much like
the "{n}" precision but returns the nth level instead of the last n levels.
Has anyone done this and where should I start?
Joe
---
