and as long as I'm thinking about it, the possibility of (more readily) making english-like syntax more so makes open sourcing much more interesting - as long as I don't feel like I'm coding in COBOL when we're done.
On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 3:04 PM, Mike Kerner <mikeker...@roadrunner.com>wrote: > it is, but I don't think we should settle for that, either. > > > On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 1:13 AM, Geoff Canyon <gcan...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Here's an interesting real(ish) world example: >> http://www.leancrew.com/all-this/2011/12/more-shell-less-egg/ >> >> The goal is to find the ten most common words in a text file. >> >> Donald Knuth wrote something in literate code form, in Pascal. The result >> was ten pages of code. In the article, Doug McIlroy wrote it in shell >> script as: >> >> 1 tr -cs A-Za-z '\n' |2 tr A-Z a-z |3 sort |4 uniq -c |5 sort -rn >> |6 sed ${1}q >> >> and called out Knuth on his supposedly more clear, ten-page solution. >> >> It turns out six lines of transcript accomplishes the same thing: >> >> repeat for each word w in replacetext(url ("file:" & >> filePath),"(?i)[^a-z]"," ") >> add 1 to c[w] >> end repeat >> combine c using cr and comma >> sort lines of c descending numeric by item 2 of each >> put line 1 to 10 of c >> >> If anyone can do it more elegantly, I'm curious to know how. But in a >> language where we can write our own syntax, this seems likely to be >> possible: >> >> put file filePath with all non-alphabetic characters replaced with space >> into fileString >> for each unique word w in fileString, put w,the count of w & cr after >> countList >> put the first 10 lines of countList sorted numeric descending by item 2 >> >> Maybe that's not clearer, but it should be possible. >> >> >> On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 4:14 PM, Geoff Canyon <gcan...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > >> > On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 2:08 PM, Monte Goulding < >> > mo...@sweattechnologies.com> wrote: >> > >> >> In my example I used "each line OF x" rather than "each line IN x". I >> >> often get caught on repeat for each line X IN y when I write OF. Could >> I >> >> add OF to the repeat syntax so it didn't matter? It seems natural to me >> >> either way. If not then perhaps our syntax should be: >> >> >> >> trim each line in X >> >> >> > >> > >> > The impression I got was that the new language ability would make it >> > fairly simple (or at least possible) to allow for either of or in. I'm >> > right there with you -- I don't actually code that often anymore, but >> > nearly every time I do, I mix up of and in. In my perfect world the >> > prepositions would be interchangeable and likely not significant, so of, >> > in, through, across, within, and maybe others. >> > >> > gc >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> use-livecode mailing list >> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com >> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your >> subscription preferences: >> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode >> > > > > -- > On the first day, God created the heavens and the Earth > On the second day, God created the oceans. > On the third day, God put the animals on hold for a few hours, > and did a little diving. > And God said, "This is good." > -- On the first day, God created the heavens and the Earth On the second day, God created the oceans. On the third day, God put the animals on hold for a few hours, and did a little diving. And God said, "This is good." _______________________________________________ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode