Ok. Here's a preliminary report. 〈Lisp, Python, Perl, Ruby … Code to Validate Matching Brackets〉 http://xahlee.org/comp/validate_matching_brackets.html
it's taking too much time to go thru. right now, i consider only one valid code, by Raymond Hettinger (with minor edit from others). right now, there's 2 other possible correct solution. One by Robert Klemme but requires ruby19 but i only have ruby18x. One by Thomas Jollans in Python 3 but didn't run on my machine perhaps due to some unix/Windows issue, yet to be done. the other 3 or 4 seems to be incomplete or just suggestion of ideas. i haven't done extensive testing on my own code neither. I'll revisit maybe in a few days. Feel free to grab my report and make it nice. If you would like to fix your code, feel free to email. Xah On Jul 21, 7:26 am, Ian Kelly <ian.g.ke...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 6:58 AM, Xah Lee <xah...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Thanks a lot for the fix Raymond. > > That fix was from Thomas Jollans, not Raymond Hettinger. > > > Though, the code seems to have a minor problem. > > It works, but the report is wrong. > > e.g. output: > > > 30068: c:/Users/h3/web/xahlee_org/p/time_machine\tm-ch04.html > > > that 30068 position is the last char in the file. > > The correct should be 28319. (or at least point somewhere in the file > > at a bracket char that doesn't match.) > Previously you wrote: > > If a file has mismatched matching-pairs, the script will display the > > file name, and the line number and column number of the first > > instance where a mismatched bracket occures. (or, just the char number > > instead (as in emacs's “point”)) > > I submit that as the file contains no mismatched brackets (only an > orphan bracket), the output is correct to specification (indeed you > did not define any output for this case), if not necessarily useful. > > In other words, stop being picky. You may be willing to spend an hour > or moe on this, but that doesn't mean anybody else is. Raymond gave > you a basically working Python solution, but forgot one detail. > Thomas fixed that detail for you but didn't invest the time to rewrite > somebody else's function to get the output "correct". Continuing to > harp on it at this point is verging on trolling. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
