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

Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #36965 > unrolled thread

Re: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options?

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

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options? "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2019-07-20 12:10 -0700
    Re: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2019-07-21 04:24 +0200
      Re: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options? John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2019-07-21 10:40 +0100
        Re: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options? Martin Leese <please@see.Web.for.e-mail.INVALID> - 2019-07-21 13:52 -0600
          Re: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options? John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2019-07-22 19:09 +0100
            Re: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options? "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2019-07-23 16:36 -0700
              Re: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2019-07-24 11:02 +0200
                Re: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options? John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2019-07-24 18:35 +0100
              Re: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options? John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2019-07-24 18:45 +0100
                Re: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options? "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2019-07-25 03:01 -0700
                  Re: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options? John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2019-07-25 18:41 +0100
                    Re: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options? "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2019-07-25 14:58 -0700
        Re: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options? Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-07-28 15:36 +0200
          Re: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options? John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2019-07-29 15:08 +0100
            Re: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options? Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-07-30 11:46 +0200
              Re: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options? John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2019-07-30 19:22 +0100
                Re: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options? Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-07-31 11:23 +0200
                  Re: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options? John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2019-07-31 19:06 +0100
                    Re: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options? Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2019-08-01 17:18 +1000
                      Re: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options? "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2019-08-01 10:03 +0200
                        Re: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options? Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2019-08-01 19:09 +1000
                          Re: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options? "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2019-08-01 13:12 +0200
                            Re: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options? Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2019-08-01 22:41 +1000
                              Re: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options? "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2019-08-01 16:38 +0200
                    Re: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options? Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-08-06 11:57 +0200
                      Re: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options? John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2019-08-06 19:17 +0100
                        Re: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options? Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-08-08 21:45 +0200
                          Re: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options? John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2019-08-09 10:23 +0100
                            Re: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options? Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-08-09 11:56 +0200
                              Re: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options? John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2019-08-10 11:05 +0100
                                Re: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options? Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-08-10 14:41 +0200
                                  Re: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options? John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2019-08-10 18:15 +0100
                                    Re: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options? Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-08-11 04:09 +0200
                                      Re: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options? John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2019-08-11 11:05 +0100
                                        Re: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options? dr.j.r.stockton@gmail.com - 2019-08-11 05:41 -0700
                                        Re: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options? Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-08-11 17:48 +0200
                                          Re: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options? John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2019-08-11 19:01 +0100
                                            Re: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options? Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-08-12 10:44 +0200
                                              Re: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options? John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2019-08-12 18:56 +0100
                                                Re: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options? Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-08-13 15:02 +0200
                                                  Re: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options? "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2019-08-13 08:55 -0700
                                                    Re: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options? Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-08-13 20:04 +0200
                                                    FAQ (was: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options?) Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2019-08-25 19:47 +0200
                                                      Re: FAQ (was: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options?) dr.j.r.stockton@gmail.com - 2019-08-25 13:51 -0700
                                                      Re: FAQ (was: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options?) Hans-Georg Michna <hans-georgNoEmailPlease@michna.com> - 2019-08-26 13:35 +0200
                                                        Re: FAQ (was: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options?) dr.j.r.stockton@gmail.com - 2019-08-27 04:57 -0700
                                                          Re: FAQ (was: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options?) Hans-Georg Michna <hans-georgNoEmailPlease@michna.com> - 2019-08-28 19:27 +0200
                                                            Re: FAQ (was: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options?) dr.j.r.stockton@gmail.com - 2019-08-28 12:51 -0700
                                                              Re: FAQ (was: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options?) Hans-Georg Michna <hans-georgNoEmailPlease@michna.com> - 2019-08-31 11:53 +0200
                                                            Re: FAQ Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-08-28 23:59 +0200

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

#36965 — Re: Where can I find a summary table of various reqular expressions options?

On Tuesday, April 6, 2004 at 8:28:19 AM UTC-5, Anonieko Ramos wrote:
> This is like a cheat sheet if I may call it.
> 
>  
> \
>  Marks the next character as either a special character, a literal, a
> backreference, or an octal escape. For example, 'n' matches the
> character "n". '\n' matches a newline character. The sequence '\\'
> matches "\" and "\(" matches "(".
>  
> ^
>  Matches the position at the beginning of the input string. If the
> 
> RegExp object's Multiline property is set, ^ also matches the position
> following '\n' or '\r'.
>  
> $
>  Matches the position at the end of the input string. If the RegExp
> object's Multiline property is set, $ also matches the position
> preceding '\n' or '\r'.
>  
> *
>  Matches the preceding subexpression zero or more times. For example,
> zo* matches "z" and "zoo". * is equivalent to {0,}.
>  
> +
>  Matches the preceding subexpression one or more times. For example,
> 'zo+' matches "zo" and "zoo", but not "z". + is equivalent to {1,}.
> 
>  
>  
> ?
>  Matches the preceding subexpression zero or one time. For example,
> "do(es)?" matches the "do" in "do" or "does". ? is equivalent to {0,1}
>  
> {n}
>  n is a nonnegative integer. Matches exactly n times. For example,
> 'o{2}' does not match the 'o' in "Bob," but matches the two o's in
> "food".
>  
> {n,m}
>  m and n are nonnegative integers, where n <= m. Matches at least n
> and at most m times. For example, "o{1,3}" matches the first three o's
> in "fooooood". 'o{0,1}' is equivalent to 'o?'. Note that you cannot
> put a space between the comma and the numbers.
>  
> ?
>  When this character immediately follows any of the other quantifiers
> (*, +, ?, {n}, {n,}, {n,m}), the matching pattern is non-greedy. A
> non-greedy pattern matches as little of the searched string as
> possible, whereas the default greedy pattern matches as much of the
> searched string as possible. For example, in the string "oooo", 'o+?'
> matches a single "o",
> 
> while 'o+' matches all 'o's.
>  
> .
>  Matches any single character except "\n". To match any character
> including the '\n', use a pattern such as '[.\n]'.
>  
> (pattern)
>  Matches pattern and captures the match. The captured match can be
> retrieved from the resulting Matches collection, using the SubMatches
> collection in VBScript or the $0.$9 properties in JScript. To match
> parentheses characters ( ), use '\(' or '\)'.
>  
> (?:pattern)
>  Matches pattern but does not capture the match, that is, it is a
> non-capturing match that is not stored for possible later use. This is
> useful for combining parts of a pattern with the "or" character (|).
> For example, 'industr(?:y|ies) is a more economical expression than
> 'industry|industries'.
>  
> (?=pattern)
>  Positive lookahead matches the search string at any point where a
> string matching pattern begins. This is a non-capturing match, that
> is, the match is not captured for possible later use. For example
> 'Windows (?=95|98|NT|2000)' matches "Windows" in "Windows 2000" but
> not "Windows" in "Windows 3.1". Lookaheads do not consume characters,
> that is, after a match occurs, the search for the next match begins
> immediately following the last
> 
> match, not after the characters that comprised the lookahead.
>  
> (?!pattern)
>  Negative lookahead matches the search string at any point where a
> string not matching pattern begins. This is a non-capturing match,
> that is, the match is not captured for possible later use. For example
> 'Windows (?!95|98|NT|2000)' matches "Windows" in "Windows 3.1" but
> does not match "Windows" in "Windows 2000". Lookaheads do not consume
> characters, that is, after a match occurs, the search for the next
> match begins immediately following the last match, not after the
> characters that comprised the lookahead.
>  
> x|y
>  Matches either x or y. For example, 'z|food' matches "z" or "food".
> '(z|f)ood' matches "zood" or "food".
>  
> [xyz]
>  A character set. Matches any one of the enclosed characters. For
> example, '[abc]' matches the 'a' in "plain".
>  
> [^xyz]
>  A negative character set. Matches any character not enclosed. For
> example, '[^abc]' matches the 'p' in "plain".
>  
> [a-z]
>  A range of characters. Matches any character in the specified range.
> For example, '[a-z]' matches any lowercase alphabetic character in the
> range 'a' through 'z'.
>  
> [^a-z]
>  A negative range characters. Matches any character not in the
> 
> specified range. For example, '[^a-z]' matches any character not in
> the range 'a' through 'z'.
>  
> \b
>  Matches a word boundary, that is, the position between a word and a
> space. For example, 'er\b' matches the 'er' in "never" but not the
> 'er' in "verb".
>  
> \B
>  Matches a nonword boundary. 'er\B' matches the 'er' in "verb" but not
> the 'er' in "never".
>  
> \cx
>  Matches the control character indicated by x. For example, \cM
> matches a Control-M or carriage return character. The value of x must
> be in the range of A-Z or a-z. If not, c is assumed to be a literal
> 'c' character.
>  
> \d
>  Matches a digit character. Equivalent to [0-9].
>  
> \D
>  Matches a nondigit character. Equivalent to [^0-9].
>  
> \f
>  Matches a form-feed character. Equivalent to \x0c and \cL.
>  
> \n
>  Matches a newline character. Equivalent to \x0a and \cJ.
>  
> \r
>  Matches a carriage return character. Equivalent to \x0d and \cM.
>  
> \s
>  Matches any whitespace character including space, tab, form-feed,
> etc. Equivalent to [ \f\n\r\t\v].
>  
> \S
>  Matches any non-white space character. Equivalent to [^\f\n\r\t\v].
>  
> \t
>  Matches a tab character. Equivalent to \x09 and \cI.
>  
> \v
>  Matches a vertical tab character. Equivalent to \x0b and \cK.
>  
> \w
>  Matches any word character including underscore. Equivalent to
> '[A-Za-z0-9_]'.
>  
> \W
>  Matches any nonword character. Equivalent to '[^A-Za-z0-9_]'.
>  
> \xn
>  Matches n, where n is a hexadecimal escape value. Hexadecimal escape
> values must be exactly two digits long. For example, '\x41' matches
> "A". '\x041' is equivalent to '\x04' & "1". Allows ASCII codes to be
> used in regular expressions.
>  
> \num
>  Matches num, where num is a positive integer. A reference back to
> captured matches. For example, '(.)\1' matches two consecutive
> identical characters.
>  
> \n
>  Identifies either an octal escape value or a backreference. If \n is
> preceded by at least n captured subexpressions, n is a backreference.
> Otherwise, n is an octal escape value if n is an octal digit (0-7).
>  
> \nm
>  Identifies either an octal escape value or a backreference. If \nm is
> preceded by at least nm captured subexpressions, nm is a
> backreference. If \nm is preceded by at least n captures, n is a
> backreference followed by literal m. If neither of the preceding
> conditions exists, \nm matches octal escape value nm when n and m are
> octal digits (0-7).
>  
> \nml
>  Matches octal escape value nml when n is an octal digit (0-3) and m
> and l are octal digits (0-7).
>  
> \un
>  Matches n, where n is a Unicode character expressed as four
> hexadecimal digits. For example, \u00A9 matches the copyright symbol
> ()).

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Guide/Regular_Expressions

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#36969

Michael Haufe (TNO) wrote:

> On Tuesday, April 6, 2004 at 8:28:19 AM UTC-5, Anonieko Ramos wrote:
              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> [full quote]
> 
> https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Guide/Regular_Expressions

Good morning, sunshine :)

-- 
PointedEars
FAQ: <http://PointedEars.de/faq> | <http://PointedEars.de/es-matrix>
<https://github.com/PointedEars> | <http://PointedEars.de/wsvn/>
Twitter: @PointedEars2 | Please do not cc me./Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

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

#36971

On Sun, 21 Jul 2019 04:24:43 +0200, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn
<PointedEars@web.de> wrote:

>Michael Haufe (TNO) wrote:
>
>> On Tuesday, April 6, 2004 at 8:28:19 AM UTC-5, Anonieko Ramos wrote:
>              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>> [full quote]

Another lie by Thomas

  <snip>

  John

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

#36973

John G Harris wrote:
> On Sun, 21 Jul 2019 04:24:43 +0200, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn
> <PointedEars@web.de> wrote:
> 
>> Michael Haufe (TNO) wrote:
>>
>>> On Tuesday, April 6, 2004 at 8:28:19 AM UTC-5, Anonieko Ramos wrote:
>>              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>>> [full quote]
> 
> Another lie by Thomas

No, we have to give him this one.
Anonieko,s computer thinks it is 2004.
However, Thomas did respond to the wrong
post.

-- 
Regards,
Martin Leese
E-mail: please@see.Web.for.e-mail.INVALID
Web: http://members.tripod.com/martin_leese/

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

#36976

On Sun, 21 Jul 2019 13:52:54 -0600, Martin Leese
<please@see.Web.for.e-mail.INVALID> wrote:

>John G Harris wrote:
>> On Sun, 21 Jul 2019 04:24:43 +0200, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn
>> <PointedEars@web.de> wrote:
>> 
>>> Michael Haufe (TNO) wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tuesday, April 6, 2004 at 8:28:19 AM UTC-5, Anonieko Ramos wrote:
>>>              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>>>> [full quote]
>> 
>> Another lie by Thomas
>
>No, we have to give him this one.
>Anonieko,s computer thinks it is 2004.
>However, Thomas did respond to the wrong
>post.

You've misundertstood. Michael did not write "[full quote]", so
quoting him as saying that is a lie.

Someone able to appraise their own work would realise this and then
write
  [full quote]
without the quote symbols. 

Even better, they would use a news program that does not allow quoted
text to be altered, if any are left.

  John

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

#36979

John G Harris wrote:

> [...]
>
> You've misundertstood. Michael did not write "[full quote]", so
> quoting him as saying that is a lie.
> 
> Someone able to appraise their own work would realise this and then
> write
>   [full quote]
> without the quote symbols. 
> 
> Even better, they would use a news program that does not allow quoted
> text to be altered, if any are left.

In support of Thomas, bracketing is an acceptable practice in quoting:

https://writingcommons.org/open-text/research-methods-methodologies/integrate-evidence/incorporate-evidence/453-inserting-or-altering-words-in-a-direct-quotation

In support of your point: The contents of the brackets need to be consistent with what was elided. Example of abuse:

"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him shall not perish, but [Win his choice of toaster oven]" -- chapter 3, verse 16 of the Gospel of John of the New Testament

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

#36991

Michael Haufe (TNO) wrote:

> John G Harris wrote:
>> [...]
>>
>> You've misundertstood. Michael did not write "[full quote]", so
>> quoting him as saying that is a lie.

Pot calling the kettle black.

>> Someone able to appraise their own work would realise this and then
>> write
>>   [full quote]
>> without the quote symbols.
>> 
>> Even better, they would use a news program that does not allow quoted
>> text to be altered, if any are left.
> 
> In support of Thomas, bracketing is an acceptable practice in quoting:

And in his desperate attempt to *whine* about *something* (that I wrote),
John G Harris did not read carefully enough.  There are *two* “>” characters 
in front of “[full quote]”.

His contributions to the topic of this newsgroup are almost none.  
Apparently, like crackpots and conspiracy theorists, his whining about the 
world is the only way for him to *feel* important and to get noticed.
Why doesn’t he just get a life or FOAD?
 
-- 
PointedEars
FAQ: <http://PointedEars.de/faq> | <http://PointedEars.de/es-matrix>
<https://github.com/PointedEars> | <http://PointedEars.de/wsvn/>
Twitter: @PointedEars2 | Please do not cc me./Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

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

#36994

On Wed, 24 Jul 2019 11:02:24 +0200, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn
<PointedEars@web.de> wrote:

>Michael Haufe (TNO) wrote:
>
>> John G Harris wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>
>>> You've misundertstood. Michael did not write "[full quote]", so
>>> quoting him as saying that is a lie.
>
>Pot calling the kettle black.
>
>>> Someone able to appraise their own work would realise this and then
>>> write
>>>   [full quote]
>>> without the quote symbols.
>>> 
>>> Even better, they would use a news program that does not allow quoted
>>> text to be altered, if any are left.
>> 
>> In support of Thomas, bracketing is an acceptable practice in quoting:
>
>And in his desperate attempt to *whine* about *something* (that I wrote),
>John G Harris did not read carefully enough.  There are *two* “>” characters 
>in front of “[full quote]”.
>
>His contributions to the topic of this newsgroup are almost none.  
>Apparently, like crackpots and conspiracy theorists, his whining about the 
>world is the only way for him to *feel* important and to get noticed.
>Why doesn’t he just get a life or FOAD?

This from the man who hurls abuse at people who add an extra one
eighth of an inch (3mm) to an attribution.

Notice his reaction is, as usual, to shout, not to justify what he
did.

  John

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

#36995

On Tue, 23 Jul 2019 16:36:51 -0700 (PDT), "Michael Haufe (TNO)"
<tno@thenewobjective.com> wrote:

>John G Harris wrote:
>
>> [...]
>>
>> You've misundertstood. Michael did not write "[full quote]", so
>> quoting him as saying that is a lie.
>> 
>> Someone able to appraise their own work would realise this and then
>> write
>>   [full quote]
>> without the quote symbols. 
>> 
>> Even better, they would use a news program that does not allow quoted
>> text to be altered, if any are left.
>
>In support of Thomas, bracketing is an acceptable practice in quoting:
>
>https://writingcommons.org/open-text/research-methods-methodologies/integrate-evidence/incorporate-evidence/453-inserting-or-altering-words-in-a-direct-quotation

In academic work yes, but even then the text in square brackets is
required to supplement the quote, not to replace it.

  John

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

#36996

On Wednesday, July 24, 2019 at 12:44:59 PM UTC-5, John G Harris wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Jul 2019 16:36:51 -0700 (PDT), "Michael Haufe (TNO)"
> wrote:
>
> >In support of Thomas, bracketing is an acceptable practice in quoting:
> >
> >https://writingcommons.org/open-text/research-methods-methodologies/integrate-evidence/incorporate-evidence/453-inserting-or-altering-words-in-a-direct-quotation
> 
> In academic work yes, but even then the text in square brackets is
> required to supplement the quote, not to replace it.

Which is what I said in the part of my response you left out.

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

#36997

On Thu, 25 Jul 2019 03:01:40 -0700 (PDT), "Michael Haufe (TNO)"
<tno@thenewobjective.com> wrote:

>On Wednesday, July 24, 2019 at 12:44:59 PM UTC-5, John G Harris wrote:
>> On Tue, 23 Jul 2019 16:36:51 -0700 (PDT), "Michael Haufe (TNO)"
>> wrote:
>>
>> >In support of Thomas, bracketing is an acceptable practice in quoting:
>> >
>> >https://writingcommons.org/open-text/research-methods-methodologies/integrate-evidence/incorporate-evidence/453-inserting-or-altering-words-in-a-direct-quotation
>> 
>> In academic work yes, but even then the text in square brackets is
>> required to supplement the quote, not to replace it.
>
>Which is what I said in the part of my response you left out.

I didn't think the bit I left out included this kind of bracketing :

Einstein wrote :
  "[Something very significant]"
which confirms that I am right.

If it did, apologies.

  John

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

#36998

On Thursday, July 25, 2019 at 12:41:41 PM UTC-5, John G Harris wrote:

> I didn't think the bit I left out included this kind of bracketing :
> 
> Einstein wrote :
>   "[Something very significant]"
> which confirms that I am right.
> 
> If it did, apologies.

The biblical quote:

"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him shall not perish, but [Win his choice of toaster oven]" -- chapter 3, verse 16 of the Gospel of John of the New Testament 

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

#37002

John G Harris:

> On Sun, 21 Jul 2019 04:24:43 +0200, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn
> <PointedEars@web.de> wrote:
> 
>> Michael Haufe (TNO) wrote:
>>
>>> On Tuesday, April 6, 2004 at 8:28:19 AM UTC-5, Anonieko Ramos wrote:
>>              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>>> [full quote]
> 
> Another lie by Thomas

What lie? Thomas just cited *another* post which had this introduction.


-- 
Arno Welzel
https://arnowelzel.de

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

#37003

On Sun, 28 Jul 2019 15:36:27 +0200, Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de>
wrote:

>John G Harris:
>
>> On Sun, 21 Jul 2019 04:24:43 +0200, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn
>> <PointedEars@web.de> wrote:
>> 
>>> Michael Haufe (TNO) wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tuesday, April 6, 2004 at 8:28:19 AM UTC-5, Anonieko Ramos wrote:
>>>              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>>>> [full quote]
>> 
>> Another lie by Thomas
>
>What lie? Thomas just cited *another* post which had this introduction.

The expression [full quote] does not appear anywhere in Michael's
article nor in the article Michael quotes, so which article is Thomas
supposedly citing? Is it his own article? An article in a different
thread? Next week's article? We should be told.

  John

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

#37004

On 29.07.19 16:08, John G Harris wrote:

> On Sun, 28 Jul 2019 15:36:27 +0200, Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de>
> wrote:
> 
>> John G Harris:
>>
>>> On Sun, 21 Jul 2019 04:24:43 +0200, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn
>>> <PointedEars@web.de> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Michael Haufe (TNO) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Tuesday, April 6, 2004 at 8:28:19 AM UTC-5, Anonieko Ramos wrote:
>>>>              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>>>>> [full quote]
>>>
>>> Another lie by Thomas
>>
>> What lie? Thomas just cited *another* post which had this introduction.
> 
> The expression [full quote] does not appear anywhere in Michael's
> article nor in the article Michael quotes, so which article is Thomas
> supposedly citing? Is it his own article? An article in a different
> thread? Next week's article? We should be told.

"[full quote]" is a placeholder for the full quote which was found
there. Maybe he could use "[full quote removed]" to make it more clear,
that there was a full quote which he removed.

But I wouldn't call this "lie" because a lie is to pretend something
which isn't true. Do you really think, the intention was to make us
believe, that Anonieko Ramos wrote "[full quote]" in exactly this way?


-- 
Arno Welzel
https://arnowelzel.de

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

#37006

On Tue, 30 Jul 2019 11:46:25 +0200, Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de>
wrote:


  <snip>
>"[full quote]" is a placeholder for the full quote which was found
>there. Maybe he could use "[full quote removed]" to make it more clear,
>that there was a full quote which he removed.

Two points for you to ponder :

One, "full quote" is a remark. Why can't it be written on its own as
  [full quote]
without any > symbols indicating that it is what someone else wrote?

Two, if you see
> [text]
how do you know who wrote the phrase in brackets? Was it the person
doing the quoting (me), or was it the person being quoted (you)? 


>But I wouldn't call this "lie" because a lie is to pretend something
>which isn't true. Do you really think, the intention was to make us
>believe, that Anonieko Ramos wrote "[full quote]" in exactly this way?

If you write "This is what he wrote" followed by something he didn't
write then it's an untruth. You may call it a terminological
inexactitude, but the simple name is lie. As to intentions, my guess
it's more a case of not thinking straight.

  John

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

#37008

On 30.07.19 20:22, John G Harris wrote:

> On Tue, 30 Jul 2019 11:46:25 +0200, Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de>
> wrote:
> 
> 
>   <snip>
>> "[full quote]" is a placeholder for the full quote which was found
>> there. Maybe he could use "[full quote removed]" to make it more clear,
>> that there was a full quote which he removed.
> 
> Two points for you to ponder :
> 
> One, "full quote" is a remark. Why can't it be written on its own as
>   [full quote]
> without any > symbols indicating that it is what someone else wrote?

Because it was someone else doing the full quote.

> Two, if you see
>> [text]
> how do you know who wrote the phrase in brackets? Was it the person
> doing the quoting (me), or was it the person being quoted (you)? 

Is this important at all? There was a full quote and it got removed. I
didn't have any problem understanding this.

>> But I wouldn't call this "lie" because a lie is to pretend something
>> which isn't true. Do you really think, the intention was to make us
>> believe, that Anonieko Ramos wrote "[full quote]" in exactly this way?
> 
> If you write "This is what he wrote" followed by something he didn't
> write then it's an untruth. You may call it a terminological
> inexactitude, but the simple name is lie. As to intentions, my guess
> it's more a case of not thinking straight.

Ok, you are right and everybody else not. Enough of this
off-topic-babbling...



-- 
Arno Welzel
https://arnowelzel.de

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

#37012

On Wed, 31 Jul 2019 11:23:06 +0200, Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de>
wrote:

>On 30.07.19 20:22, John G Harris wrote:
  <snip>
>> Two points for you to ponder :
>> 
>> One, "full quote" is a remark. Why can't it be written on its own as
>>   [full quote]
>> without any > symbols indicating that it is what someone else wrote?
>
>Because it was someone else doing the full quote.

That's not logical. All quoted text is by someone else.


  <snip>
>Ok, you are right and everybody else not. Enough of this
>off-topic-babbling...

You are asking for the FAQ to be changed. Of course it's on topic.

  John

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

#37014

On 1/08/2019 4:06 am, John G Harris wrote:

> That's not logical. All quoted text is by someone else.

If I'm quoting myself then I'm not "someone else" (at least not to me).

Andrew Poulos

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

#37015

Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> wrote on 01 Aug 2019 in 
comp.lang.javascript:

> On 1/08/2019 4:06 am, John G Harris wrote:
> 
>> That's not logical. All quoted text is by someone else.
> 
> If I'm quoting myself then I'm not "someone else" (at least not to me).

That you think you exist is the primordial fallacy
[as introduced by Descartes].

-- 
Evertjan.
The Netherlands.
(Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)

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

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

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

csiph-web