Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages

Liste des GroupesRevenir à cu shell 
Sujet : Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages
De : rweikusat (at) *nospam* talktalk.net (Rainer Weikusat)
Groupes : comp.unix.shell comp.unix.programmer comp.lang.misc
Date : 22. Nov 2024, 18:48:37
Autres entêtes
Message-ID : <87o727rwga.fsf@doppelsaurus.mobileactivedefense.com>
References : 1 2 3 4 5
User-Agent : Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux)
cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) writes:
Rainer Weikusat  <rweikusat@talktalk.net> wrote:
cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) writes:
Rainer Weikusat  <rweikusat@talktalk.net> wrote:
cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) writes:
[snip]
It's also not exactly right.  `[0-9]+` would match one or more
characters; this possibly matches 0 (ie, if `p` pointed to
something that wasn't a digit).
>
The regex won't match any digits if there aren't any. In this case, the
match will fail. I didn't include the code for handling that because it
seemed pretty pointless for the example.
>
That's rather the point though, isn't it?  The program snippet
(modulo the promotion to signed int via the "usual arithmetic
conversions" before the subtraction and comparison giving you
unexpected values; nothing to do with whether `char` is signed
or not) is a snippet that advances a pointer while it points to
a digit, starting at the current pointer position; that is, it
just increments a pointer over a run of digits.
>
That's the core part of matching someting equivalent to the regex [0-9]+
and the only part of it is which is at least remotely interesting.
>
Not really, no.  The interesting thing in this case appears to
be knowing whether or not the match succeeded, but you omited
that part.

This of interest to you as it enables you to base an 'argumentation'
(sarcasm) on arbitrary assumptions you've chosen to make. It's not
something I consider interesting and it's besides the point of the
example I posted.

But that's not the same as a regex matcher, which has a semantic
notion of success or failure.  I could run your snippet against
a string such as, say, "ZZZZZZ" and it would "succeed" just as
it would against an empty string or a string of one or more
digits.
>
Why do you believe that p being equivalent to the starting position
would be considered a "successful match", considering that this
obviously doesn't make any sense?
>
Because absent any surrounding context, there's no indication
that the source is even saved.

A text usually doesn't contain information about things which aren't
part of its content. I congratulate you to this rather obvious observation.

[...]

Something which would match [0-9]+ in its first argument (if any) would
be:
>
#include "string.h"
#include "stdlib.h"
>
int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
   char *p;
   unsigned c;
>
   p = argv[1];
   if (!p) exit(1);
   while (c = *p, c && c - '0' > 10) ++p;
   if (!c) exit(1);
   return 0;
}
>
but that's 14 lines of text, 13 of which have absolutely no relation to
the problem of recognizing a digit.
>
This is wrong in many ways.  Did you actually test that program?
>
First of all, why `"string.h"` and not `<string.h>`?  Ok, that's
not technically an error, but it's certainly unconventional, and
raises questions that are ultimately a distraction.

Such as your paragraph above.

Second, suppose that `argc==0` (yes, this can happen under
POSIX).

It can happen in case of some piece of functionally hostile software
intentionally creating such a situation. Tangential, irrelevant
point. If you break it, you get to keep the parts.

Third, the loop: why `> 10`? Don't you mean `< 10`?  You are
trying to match digits, not non-digits.

Mistake I made. The opposite of < 10 is > 9.

Fourth, you exit with failure (`exit(1)`) if `!p` *and* if `!c`
at the end, but `!c` there means you've reached the end of the
string; which should be success.

Mistake you made: [0-9]+ matches if there's at least one digit in the
string. That's why the loop terminates once one was found. In this case,
c cannot be 0.

Date Sujet#  Auteur
29 Mar 24 * Command Languages Versus Programming Languages708Lawrence D'Oliveiro
29 Mar 24 +- Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages1candycanearter07
29 Mar 24 +* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages19Janis Papanagnou
29 Mar 24 i+* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages15Lawrence D'Oliveiro
30 Mar 24 ii`* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages14Janis Papanagnou
30 Mar 24 ii +* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages3Janis Papanagnou
30 Mar 24 ii i`* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages2Keith Thompson
30 Mar 24 ii i `- Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages1Janis Papanagnou
30 Mar 24 ii +* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages6Lawrence D'Oliveiro
30 Mar 24 ii i+* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages3Keith Thompson
30 Mar 24 ii ii`* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages2Lawrence D'Oliveiro
30 Mar 24 ii ii `- Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages1Keith Thompson
30 Mar 24 ii i`* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages2Janis Papanagnou
30 Mar 24 ii i `- Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages1Lawrence D'Oliveiro
30 Mar 24 ii +* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages3Keith Thompson
30 Mar 24 ii i`* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages2Janis Papanagnou
30 Mar 24 ii i `- Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages1Keith Thompson
31 Mar 24 ii `- Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages1Lawrence D'Oliveiro
29 Mar 24 i`* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages3Stefan Ram
30 Mar 24 i `* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages2Janis Papanagnou
30 Mar 24 i  `- Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages1Lawrence D'Oliveiro
29 Mar 24 +* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages168Muttley
29 Mar 24 i+- Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages1Josef Möllers
29 Mar 24 i+* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages9Richard Kettlewell
29 Mar 24 ii`* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages8Muttley
29 Mar 24 ii `* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages7Kaz Kylheku
29 Mar 24 ii  `* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages6Muttley
29 Mar 24 ii   `* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages5Kaz Kylheku
30 Mar 24 ii    `* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages4Muttley
30 Mar 24 ii     +- Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages1Janis Papanagnou
30 Mar 24 ii     `* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages2Kaz Kylheku
1 Apr 24 ii      `- Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages1Muttley
29 Mar 24 i`* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages157John Ames
29 Mar 24 i +* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages155Muttley
29 Mar 24 i i+- Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages1John Ames
29 Mar 24 i i+* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages149Kaz Kylheku
29 Mar 24 i ii`* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages148Muttley
29 Mar 24 i ii +* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages146Kaz Kylheku
29 Mar 24 i ii i+* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages4David W. Hodgins
29 Mar 24 i ii ii+* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages2Johanne Fairchild
30 Mar 24 i ii iii`- Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages1David W. Hodgins
30 Mar 24 i ii ii`- Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages1Janis Papanagnou
30 Mar 24 i ii i`* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages141Muttley
30 Mar 24 i ii i `* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages140Kaz Kylheku
1 Apr 24 i ii i  `* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages139Muttley
1 Apr 24 i ii i   +* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages137Johanne Fairchild
1 Apr 24 i ii i   i`* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages136Muttley
1 Apr 24 i ii i   i +- Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages1Kaz Kylheku
2 Apr 24 i ii i   i `* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages134Johanne Fairchild
2 Apr 24 i ii i   i  +* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages113ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram)
2 Apr 24 i ii i   i  i+* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages111Stefan Ram
2 Apr 24 i ii i   i  ii+* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages109Stefan Ram
3 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii`* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages108Lawrence D'Oliveiro
3 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii `* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages107David Brown
3 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii  +- Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages1Lawrence D'Oliveiro
3 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii  +- Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages1John Ames
3 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii  `* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages104Keith Thompson
3 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii   +* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages99Richard Kettlewell
4 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii   i+- Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages1Muttley
4 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii   i`* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages97Stefan Ram
5 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii   i `* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages96Lawrence D'Oliveiro
5 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii   i  +* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages49Muttley
5 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii   i  i+* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages3candycanearter07
5 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii   i  ii`* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages2Muttley
6 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii   i  ii `- Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages1candycanearter07
6 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii   i  i`* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages45Lawrence D'Oliveiro
6 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii   i  i `* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages44Alan Bawden
6 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii   i  i  +* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages13Lawrence D'Oliveiro
8 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii   i  i  i`* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages12John Ames
9 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii   i  i  i `* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages11Lawrence D'Oliveiro
9 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii   i  i  i  +* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages9John Ames
9 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii   i  i  i  i`* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages8Richard Kettlewell
9 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii   i  i  i  i +* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages2Janis Papanagnou
9 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii   i  i  i  i i`- Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages1Richard Kettlewell
9 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii   i  i  i  i `* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages5David Brown
9 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii   i  i  i  i  `* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages4Lawrence D'Oliveiro
9 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii   i  i  i  i   `* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages3David Brown
10 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii   i  i  i  i    `* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages2Lawrence D'Oliveiro
10 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii   i  i  i  i     `- Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages1Kaz Kylheku
9 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii   i  i  i  `- Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages1Kaz Kylheku
6 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii   i  i  +* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages3Kaz Kylheku
6 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii   i  i  i`* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages2David Brown
6 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii   i  i  i `- Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages1Muttley
6 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii   i  i  +- Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages1candycanearter07
6 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii   i  i  `* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages26Muttley
7 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii   i  i   +* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages22Alan Bawden
8 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii   i  i   i`* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages21Muttley
8 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii   i  i   i `* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages20David Brown
8 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii   i  i   i  `* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages19Muttley
8 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii   i  i   i   +* Words to the wise (Was: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages)2Kenny McCormack
8 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii   i  i   i   i`- Re: Words to the wise (Was: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages)1Muttley
8 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii   i  i   i   `* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages16Kaz Kylheku
8 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii   i  i   i    +* Phrases that should be banned on Usenet (Was: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages)9Kenny McCormack
9 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii   i  i   i    i`* Re: Phrases that should be banned on Usenet (Was: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages)8Janis Papanagnou
9 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii   i  i   i    i +- Re: Phrases that should be banned on Usenet (Was: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages)1D
9 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii   i  i   i    i `* Re: Phrases that should be banned on Usenet (Was: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages)6candycanearter07
9 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii   i  i   i    i  `* Re: Phrases that should be banned on Usenet (Was: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages)5Janis Papanagnou
9 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii   i  i   i    i   +- Re: Phrases that should be banned on Usenet (Was: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages)1candycanearter07
10 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii   i  i   i    i   `* Re: Phrases that should be banned on Usenet (Was: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages)3Lawrence D'Oliveiro
10 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii   i  i   i    i    +- Re: Phrases that should be banned on Usenet (Was: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages)1Chris Elvidge
10 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii   i  i   i    i    `- Re: Phrases that should be banned on Usenet (Was: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages)1candycanearter07
9 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii   i  i   i    `* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages6Muttley
8 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii   i  i   +- [meta] Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages1Janis Papanagnou
10 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii   i  i   `* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages2Keith Thompson
5 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii   i  `* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages46Janis Papanagnou
3 Apr 24 i ii i   i  iii   `* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages4David Brown
2 Apr 24 i ii i   i  ii`- Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages1Kaz Kylheku
2 Apr 24 i ii i   i  i`- Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages1Kaz Kylheku
2 Apr 24 i ii i   i  `* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages20Lawrence D'Oliveiro
1 Apr 24 i ii i   `- Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages1Lawrence D'Oliveiro
1 Apr 24 i ii `- Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages1Andreas Eder
29 Mar 24 i i+- Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages1Christian Weisgerber
30 Mar 24 i i+* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages2David Brown
30 Sep 24 i i`- Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages1Bozo User
29 Mar 24 i `- Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages1Kaz Kylheku
29 Mar 24 +* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages510Johanne Fairchild
29 Mar 24 +* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages2David Brown
30 Mar 24 +* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages3Dmitry A. Kazakov
30 Sep 24 `* Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages4Bozo User

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal