Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.c > #10943 > unrolled thread

Text processing

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c

Contents

  Text processing jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2011-09-26 12:29 +0200
    Re: Text processing Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-09-26 13:18 +0100
      Re: Text processing jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2011-09-26 17:06 +0200
        Re: Text processing Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-09-26 19:07 +0100
      Re: Text processing "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2011-09-26 16:16 +0100
      Re: Text processing Harald van Dijk <truedfx@gmail.com> - 2011-09-26 12:36 -0700
        Re: Text processing Harald van Dijk <truedfx@gmail.com> - 2011-09-26 13:33 -0700
          Re: Text processing jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2011-09-26 22:45 +0200
          Re: Text processing Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-03-07 15:48 -0800
        Re: Text processing Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-09-26 22:58 +0100
          Re: Text processing Harald van Dijk <truedfx@gmail.com> - 2011-09-26 15:40 -0700
            Re: Text processing Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-09-27 01:41 +0100
              Re: Text processing Harald van Dijk <truedfx@gmail.com> - 2011-09-26 17:55 -0700
                Re: Text processing Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-09-27 02:41 +0100
                  Re: Text processing Harald van Dijk <truedfx@gmail.com> - 2011-09-26 22:56 -0700
                    Re: Text processing Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-09-27 12:51 +0100
          Re: Text processing pacman@kosh.dhis.org (Alan Curry) - 2011-09-27 01:05 +0000
            Re: Text processing Harald van Dijk <truedfx@gmail.com> - 2011-09-26 18:09 -0700
          Re: Text processing James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-09-26 21:43 -0400
            Re: Text processing Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-09-27 02:46 +0100
    Re: Text processing Mark Storkamp <mstorkamp@yahoo.com> - 2011-09-26 08:34 -0500
      Re: Text processing "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2011-09-26 15:47 +0100
        Re: Text processing jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2011-09-26 17:02 +0200
      Re: Text processing jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2011-09-26 17:03 +0200
      Re: Text processing Nobody <nobody@nowhere.com> - 2011-09-26 18:36 +0100
        Re: Text processing hormelfree@gmail.com - 2012-03-07 17:39 -0800
          Re: Text processing Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-03-07 19:09 -0800
      Re: Text processing pete <pfiland@mindspring.com> - 2011-09-26 19:46 -0400
    Re: Text processing Kleuskes & Moos <kleuske@somewhere.else.net> - 2011-09-26 14:02 +0000
      Re: Text processing Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-09-26 12:42 -0700
    Re: Text processing Ben Pfaff <blp@cs.stanford.edu> - 2011-09-26 11:11 -0700
      Re: Text processing jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2011-09-26 21:01 +0200

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#10945

In article <j5pk64$vsu$1@speranza.aioe.org>,
 jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> wrote:

> A widely used application of text files are program files. Most
> programming languages (and here C is not an exception) store the
> program in text format.

I'm not sure who your target audience is, but I find this to be less 
precise than I believe it should be. I think most people, when they 
think of programs, are thinking of the executable binaries, not the 
source code. While some languages, like BASIC, and other interpreted 
languages do indeed save their programs as text files, C and most others 
do not.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10948

"Mark Storkamp" <mstorkamp@yahoo.com> wrote in message 
news:mstorkamp-62451D.08340226092011@news.eternal-september.org...
> In article <j5pk64$vsu$1@speranza.aioe.org>,
> jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> wrote:
>
>> A widely used application of text files are program files. Most
>> programming languages (and here C is not an exception) store the
>> program in text format.
>
> I'm not sure who your target audience is, but I find this to be less
> precise than I believe it should be. I think most people, when they
> think of programs, are thinking of the executable binaries, not the
> source code. While some languages, like BASIC, and other interpreted
> languages do indeed save their programs as text files, C and most others
> do not.

I think he means program source code.

-- 
Bartc 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10949

Le 26/09/11 16:47, BartC a écrit :
>
>
> "Mark Storkamp" <mstorkamp@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:mstorkamp-62451D.08340226092011@news.eternal-september.org...
>> In article <j5pk64$vsu$1@speranza.aioe.org>,
>> jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> wrote:
>>
>>> A widely used application of text files are program files. Most
>>> programming languages (and here C is not an exception) store the
>>> program in text format.
>>
>> I'm not sure who your target audience is, but I find this to be less
>> precise than I believe it should be. I think most people, when they
>> think of programs, are thinking of the executable binaries, not the
>> source code. While some languages, like BASIC, and other interpreted
>> languages do indeed save their programs as text files, C and most others
>> do not.
>
> I think he means program source code.
>

Well, just a summary reading of the article would let you know
that I am aiming at the C source code text...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10950

Le 26/09/11 15:34, Mark Storkamp a écrit :
> In article<j5pk64$vsu$1@speranza.aioe.org>,
>   jacob navia<jacob@spamsink.net>  wrote:
>
>> A widely used application of text files are program files. Most
>> programming languages (and here C is not an exception) store the
>> program in text format.
>
> I'm not sure who your target audience is, but I find this to be less
> precise than I believe it should be. I think most people, when they
> think of programs, are thinking of the executable binaries, not the
> source code. While some languages, like BASIC, and other interpreted
> languages do indeed save their programs as text files, C and most others
> do not.

Yes, I will add source code explicitely.

Thanks

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10955

On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 08:34:03 -0500, Mark Storkamp wrote:

>> A widely used application of text files are program files. Most
>> programming languages (and here C is not an exception) store the
>> program in text format.
> 
> I'm not sure who your target audience is, but I find this to be less 
> precise than I believe it should be. I think most people, when they 
> think of programs, are thinking of the executable binaries, not the 
> source code. While some languages, like BASIC, and other interpreted 
> languages do indeed save their programs as text files, C and most others 
> do not.

Another counter-example is that many older dialects of BASIC *didn't*
store their programs as text files, but used a tokenised format for the
sake of space and performance.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#18311

On Monday, September 26, 2011 10:36:49 AM UTC-7, Nobody wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 08:34:03 -0500, Mark Storkamp wrote:
> 
> >> A widely used application of text files are program files. Most
> >> programming languages (and here C is not an exception) store the
> >> program in text format.
> > 
> > I'm not sure who your target audience is, but I find this to be less 
> > precise than I believe it should be. I think most people, when they 
> > think of programs, are thinking of the executable binaries, not the 
> > source code. While some languages, like BASIC, and other interpreted 
> > languages do indeed save their programs as text files, C and most others 
> > do not.
> 
> Another counter-example is that many older dialects of BASIC *didn't*
> store their programs as text files, but used a tokenised format for the
> sake of space and performance.

I think that was called "Java(TM)"...  

---
William Ernest Reid

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#18312

hormelfree@gmail.com writes:
> On Monday, September 26, 2011 10:36:49 AM UTC-7, Nobody wrote:
>> On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 08:34:03 -0500, Mark Storkamp wrote:
>> 
>> >> A widely used application of text files are program files. Most
>> >> programming languages (and here C is not an exception) store the
>> >> program in text format.
>> > 
>> > I'm not sure who your target audience is, but I find this to be less 
>> > precise than I believe it should be. I think most people, when they 
>> > think of programs, are thinking of the executable binaries, not the 
>> > source code. While some languages, like BASIC, and other interpreted 
>> > languages do indeed save their programs as text files, C and most others 
>> > do not.
>> 
>> Another counter-example is that many older dialects of BASIC *didn't*
>> store their programs as text files, but used a tokenised format for the
>> sake of space and performance.
>
> I think that was called "Java(TM)"...  

I didn't see a smiley, so ...

No, that's not the same thing at all.

Java source code is text.  It's typically *compiled* to byte code,
referred to as "Java bytecode".  Other languages can be, and are,
compiled to the same byte code used by Java implementations, and
Java source can be compiled to things other than Java bytecode.

What "Nobody" is referring to is that there have been implementations
of BASIC where the program *source*, though it might be displayed as
text, is never actually stored as text.  For example, the keyword
"GOSUB" would not be stored as the 5 characters 'G', 'O', 'S',
'U', 'B', but as a single encoded byte (that's displayed as "GOSUB"
by the specialized editor used to create and modify BASIC programs).

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
    Will write code for food.
"We must do something.  This is something.  Therefore, we must do this."
    -- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10979

Mark Storkamp wrote:
 
> I'm not sure who your target audience is, but I find this to be less
> precise than I believe it should be. I think most people, when they
> think of programs, are thinking of the executable binaries, not the
> source code. While some languages, like BASIC, and other interpreted
> languages do indeed save their programs as text files,
> C and most others do not.

You are wrong.
A C program is what gets translated.
A C program not the result of the translation.

ISO/IEC 9899
5.1 Conceptual models
5.1.1 Translation environment
5.1.1.1 Program structure

    1 A C program need not all be translated at the same time. 
      The text of the program is kept in units called source files, 
      (or preprocessing files) in this International Standard.

-- 
pete

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10946

On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 12:29:26 +0200, jacob navia wrote:

> Following the series about commenting code, here is an installment about
> text processing.
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> Thanks for your attention.
<snip>

Without actually delving into the code, i notice the attempt is pretty much
useless since many, nay, most languages do limit themselves to the ascii-
standard. Even for an example program, this is a serious omission if you're
claiming to do machine translations.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 _______________________________________
/ Yow! Did something bad happen or am I \
\ in a drive-in movie??                 /
 ---------------------------------------
  \
   \
       ___  
     {~._.~}
      ( Y )
     ()~*~()   
     (_)-(_)   
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10961

Kleuskes & Moos <kleuske@somewhere.else.net> writes:
[...]
> Without actually delving into the code, i notice the attempt is pretty much
> useless since many, nay, most languages do limit themselves to the ascii-
> standard.
[...]

I think you accidentally a word there.

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
"We must do something.  This is something.  Therefore, we must do this."
    -- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10957

jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> writes:

> Following the series about commenting code, here is an installment about
> text processing.
>
> What do you think?

There is existing software that does a pretty good job with
string translations (e.g. GNU gettext).  I don't know whether you
are actually writing new software that also handles this, or
whether you are just pointing out a way that it can be done to
people new to the topic.  If it's the former, it seems somewhat
wasteful (what's inadequate about current attempts?); if it's the
latter, that makes some sense to me.
-- 
Ben Pfaff 
http://benpfaff.org

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10958

Le 26/09/11 20:11, Ben Pfaff a écrit :
> jacob navia<jacob@spamsink.net>  writes:
>
>> Following the series about commenting code, here is an installment about
>> text processing.
>>
>> What do you think?
>
> There is existing software that does a pretty good job with
> string translations (e.g. GNU gettext).  I don't know whether you
> are actually writing new software that also handles this, or
> whether you are just pointing out a way that it can be done to
> people new to the topic.  If it's the former, it seems somewhat
> wasteful (what's inadequate about current attempts?); if it's the
> latter, that makes some sense to me.

I have written in the context of my IDE a better software than that.
The objective here is to present simple code that does some
filtering, and discuss its problems and ways to improve it an hand
of actual code.

This improves the S/N ration of this group.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c

csiph-web