|
The or operator in regular expressions of my bane.
I usually wind up putting them in parentheses just to be sure it knows what I mean.
|
|
|
|
|
i found it hard to remember too until i wrote a regular expression parser.
everything not in parentheses gets concatenated so
foo*|[r-z]|asd?AS(da)s|bar
gets turned into this list of 4 alternates/disjunctions:
1. foo*
2. [r-z]
3. asd?AS(da)s
4. bar
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
|
|
|
|
|
I just get paranoid whenever I use the or operator.
|
|
|
|
|
generally i do too. i think it's a sign of experience, since they tend to introduce bugs into places where people rely on precedence. For some reason "and" is more predictable i guess.
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
|
|
|
|
|
And, the code is ... where ?
«Where is the Life we have lost in living? Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge? Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?» T. S. Elliot
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Time for a takeover by CodeProject and call it Maunders Super Duper News Magazine 
|
|
|
|
|
MSDN saif: thank you for supporting Microsoft’s platform evolution over the years
I stopped supporting the platform evolution years ago, when it started evolving into cr@p.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: We realized that it is time to retire MSDN Magazine and to carry on its work through Web channels like docs.microsoft.com.
They don't say exactly WHY it's time to retire the magazine, so here's my best guess.
Since they've discovered that they can offload software testing to the public, they are going to try the same thing with the documentation. 
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
|
They get more ad revenue from targeted ads and revolving ad boxes -- neither of which you can do in print. So it's not got anything to do with "the way of the future" or "better for our readers"; it's the almighty buck.
But that just goes to show how internet ad giants have conned businesses into spending an order of magnitude more on advertising. I still haven't seen any figures from outside google or fb that clearly demonstrate that all this extra spending on advertising provides any increase in ROI whatsoever.
Personally, I think MSDN is making a mistake. They're moving from a market where they're one of the few big players into a market where there are a lot of big players.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Oh good point. I didn't think of that. 
So you are saying that the MSDN documentation is going to have ads? 
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
|
Richard Andrew x64 wrote: So you are saying that the MSDN documentation is going to have ads?
Now there's a scary -- but quite believable -- thought.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
I didn't even realize the damned thing was still being published on paper. I've had an MSDN membership for over 20 years, and haven't received the paper version for the last several.
Kind of makes me wonder what my $2500/year goes for...
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
Magazine was published by a separate company. I didn’t think it was ever part of the MSDN subscription from Microsoft. They may have thrown it in at some point, I guess, but not for a long time.
As for that $2500/year, /shrug. Subsidizing new VS icons? I thought they also shut down the subscriber downloads, so I guess all that’s left is your Azure monthly credit?
TTFN - Kent
|
|
|
|
|
Kent Sharkey wrote: I thought they also shut down the subscriber downloads, so I guess all that’s left is your Azure monthly credit?
Subscriber downloads are still there. The "Azure monthly credit" on the other hand is worthless. I tried to use it last year at one point and every attempt led to a prompt for a pay plan of one sort or another.
"Developers, developers, developers!" my sagging middle-aged ass.
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
And, being online, we won't have to type in those bit.ly links anymore.
|
|
|
|
|
we've been friends for over 32 years but we lost touch some time last year.
i'm trying to invite him to the board. we used to code 8 bit crap on apples together.
yay. i will bring everyone here, and we will descend like locusts upon you all 
i will BRING ALL THE NERDS
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
|
|
|
|
|
MOST OF US ARE HERE ALREADY.
Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640
Never throw anything away, Griff
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
honey the monster, codewitch wrote: i will BRING ALL THE NERDS
Did you ever hear about someone bringing owls to Athens?
I have lived with several Zen masters - all of them were cats.
His last invention was an evil Lasagna. It didn't kill anyone, and it actually tasted pretty good.
|
|
|
|
|
who?
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
|
|
|
|
|
You, in this case. We have a shortage of nerds here, just as Athens always had a shortage of owls[^].
I have lived with several Zen masters - all of them were cats.
His last invention was an evil Lasagna. It didn't kill anyone, and it actually tasted pretty good.
|
|
|
|
|
|
honey the monster, codewitch wrote: i will BRING ALL THE NERDS
In other news, more chocolate offerings at Willy Wonka's chocolate factory 
|
|
|
|
|
I've broken up the different parser / lexer generator tasks into console accessible operations
so - if you want to take an XBNF document
like this
grammar<start>= productions;
productions<collapsed> = production productions | production;
production= identifier [ "<" attributes ">" ] "=" expressions ";";
expressions<collapsed>= expression { "|" expression };
expression= { symbol };
symbol= literal | regex | identifier |
"(" expressions ")" |
"[" expressions "]" |
"{" expressions ("}"|"}+");
...
and turn into a pck spec (which you have to do before you can do much else with it)
grammar:start
productions:collapsed
expressions:collapsed
symbollist:collapsed
attributelisttail:collapsed
grammar-> productions
productions-> production productions
productions-> production
production-> identifier lt attributes gt eq expressions semi
production-> identifier eq expressions semi
expressions-> expression expressionlisttail
expressions-> expression
expression-> symbollist
expression->
symbol-> literal
symbol-> regex
symbol-> identifier
symbol-> lparen expressions rparen
symbol-> lbracket expressions rbracket
symbol-> lbrace expressions rbrace
symbol-> lbrace expressions rbracePlus
...
you'd use the command line like
pckw xlt xbnf.xbnf xbnf.pck
now, before you can use it with an LL(1) parser (including mine, or say Coco/R) you have to "factor" it
from the command line
pckw ll1 xbnf.pck xbnf.ll1.pck
you can then generate the code for it or export it whatever
pckw fagen xbnf.ll1.pck XbnfTokenizer.cs
pckw ll1gen xbnf.ll1.pck XbnfParser.cs
or you can pipe these operations. Like, turn an xbnf grammar into a parser:
pckw xlt xbnf.xbnf /transform xbnfToPck | pckw ll1 | pckw ll1gen /class XbnfParser > XbnfParser.cs
My question is, is this too much BS?
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
