> find "<A HREF=" & a string theUrl & ">"...
Ruediger,
of all your proposal I like this best. Although we might want to drop the
"a", that is:
find expression "<A HREF=" & string theURL & ">"
Of course, once this expression is found, the foundChunk would contain the
start and end positions of the whole expression found, and we could parse
it for its parameters. or we could have a new function like param() which
allows returning the wildcard, i.e. wildcard(1) or something like that (I
can't seem to come up with a good name right now). Maybe we'd write:
find expression "<A HREF=" & wildcard string theURL & ">"
Although we'd lose some English-like-ness this way.
>We also may need characters out of a set of characters
> an item of "one,two,three"
> a character in "([{<"
Good idea.
> find "(" & a string txt & ")" or "[" & a string txt & "]" or ...
I don't like this. What if someone wants a boolean expression in there?
I.e. look for "something<*>=TRUE" or "something<*>=FALSE" when scanning
some cryptic codes? I think we'd best work around it this way:
find expression ... or expression ...
by prefixing both with "expression", we differentiate between find "string"
and find expression, and since "or expression" can't be mixed up with "or"
in a boolean expression, this would work (except if someone had a variable
named "expression" and did an "or" on it, but that's tough luck.
Cheers,
-- M. Uli Kusterer
------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.weblayout.com/witness
'The Witnesses of TeachText are everywhere...'
--- HELP SAVE HYPERCARD: ---
Details at: http://www.hyperactivesw.com/SaveHC.html
Sign: http://www.giguere.uqam.ca/petition/hcpetition.html
