> I meant a single pass for each block. The filter solution has to make a
> new pass through the text for each word we want to filter on. But
> regardless, it still shows very well in my tests.
Actually, the filter pass does not have to make a new pass through *ALL* of
the text.
Since I wrote it
Jim Ault wrote:
On 11/29/06 3:37 PM, "J. Landman Gay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This looks promising, thanks. It looks like there is no single-pass
method, but since filter is pretty fast it may do okay. I didn't even
quote your regex explanation, I don't want to touch it. :)
You mention sing
On 30 Nov 2006, at 00:31, Brian Yennie wrote:
You just need to pass through the text once, and "cross off" each
word as you find it. If everything is crossed off when you're done,
then you're done =).
That's a much better idea than mine, so:
function aMatch pWords,tText
-- first remove p
On 11/29/06 4:31 PM, "Brian Yennie" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I do think that algorithmically
> one-pass is definitely possible. You just need to pass through the
> text once, and "cross off" each word as you find it. If everything is
> crossed off when you're done, then you're done =).
Good i
On 11/29/06 3:37 PM, "J. Landman Gay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This looks promising, thanks. It looks like there is no single-pass
> method, but since filter is pretty fast it may do okay. I didn't even
> quote your regex explanation, I don't want to touch it. :)
You mention single pass...
Que
This looks promising, thanks. It looks like there is no single-pass
method, but since filter is pretty fast it may do okay.
Not sure how robust my stab was, but I do think that algorithmically
one-pass is definitely possible. You just need to pass through the
text once, and "cross off" each
Jim Ault wrote:
I would tackle this using the filter command
replace cr with tab in textStr
set the wholematches to true
filter textStr with "*"& token1&"*"
filter textStr with "*"& token2&"*"
filter textStr with "*"& token3&"*"
if textStr is empty then return false
else return true
A better
On 11/29/06 1:26 PM, "J. Landman Gay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I need a matchtext/regex that will find a series of words in a block of
> text, no matter whether they are together or not, and ignoring carriage
> returns. For example:
>
> See if all of these words: dog cat dinosaur
>
> are in
On 11/29/06 3:26 PM, "J. Landman Gay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I need a matchtext/regex that will find a series of words in a block of
> text, no matter whether they are together or not, and ignoring carriage
> returns. For example:
>
> See if all of these words: dog cat dinosaur
>
> are in
I need a matchtext/regex that will find a series of words in a block of
text, no matter whether they are together or not, and ignoring carriage
returns. For example:
See if all of these words: dog cat dinosaur
are in this text:
"The purple dinosaur inadvertently stepped on the cat.
The white do
I need a matchtext/regex that will find a series of words in a block of
text, no matter whether they are together or not, and ignoring carriage
returns. For example:
See if all of these words: dog cat dinosaur
are in this text:
"The purple dinosaur inadvertently stepped on the cat.
The white
11 matches
Mail list logo
