[REBOL] Re: Perl is to stupid to understand this 1 liner.
From: carl:cybercraft at: 15-Dec-2001 23:12
On 15-Dec-01, Petr Krenzelok wrote:
> Carl used parse without any need to define a rule, e.g. parse
> some-string none will give you a block of strings separated by space
I planned to use a rule at the start, but then noticed that just a
check of length would do the trick. But then Joel changed the
> But why not to use rule? Because of having everything on one line?
> OK, with rebol - it is pretty legal to have whole script on one line
> (if you don't use comments of course :-), so:
> digits: charset "0123456789" spacer: #"-"
> tel-num: [3 digits spacer some [digits | spacer]] parse/all text
> [some [start: tel-num end: (print copy/part start end) | skip]]
> == true
> I know that tel-num rule allows for some 999------, but that is
> sufficient for our demo ... Just put on one line, shorten word
> names, and replace rebol code in parens to get your result ...
> If someone finds easier solution (e.g. iteration based) for my
> string replacement, cool then :-)
> hide-it: func [s e][ l: length? copy/part s e remove/part s e
> insert/dup s "#" l)
> parse/all text [some [start: tel-num end: (hide-it) | skip]]
> ; <----- clear and readable, isn't it? :-)
The height of clarity - but it doesn't work. (: The hide-it func ends
in a ")" not a "]" and where it's used in the parse line the 's and
'e parameters aren't given. I take it you didn't test it? (:
But never mind. When fixed it works, unlike what I was doing till I
read your post...
> Well, on the other hand
> not so straightforward as your Perl example ...
Perhaps Joel would now like to write a version in Perl that's designed
to be as clear as possible as apposed to as short as possible?