Subject:
|
Re: // and ** vs {} and [] (was: testing in rtl...)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.publish, lugnet.admin.nntp
|
Date:
|
Fri, 30 May 2003 17:48:50 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
4641 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.publish, Todd Lehman wrote:
> In lugnet.publish, Brian H. Nielsen wrote:
> > I think you'll find too many anomalies if FTX supports // and ** directly.
>
> That's what I used to think too -- but I'm not so sure anymore...
>
> > http://www.lugnet.com/publish/ftx/guide/
>
> I don't think the parser would get confused by this because of two things: (1)
> the double slash and (2) the http: prefix.
>
> > //www.lugnet.com/publish/ftx/guide/
>
> I've never seen anyone write anything like that before. But in any case, it's
> got two leading slashes instead of one.
>
> > One plate is 1/3 the height of a brick and 2 plates 2/3 the height.
>
> Ya, the parser would ignore those because the slashes aren't at the beginnings
> or endings of words.
>
> > I'll be there on 5/30/03 at noon.
>
> Ditto.
>
> > You need to put a </TD> tag after the </A> tag.
>
> If you're posting in FTX, the < > characters mean something else anyway. And if
> you're posting in plain text, the < > wouldn't be beginning- or end-of-word
> characters.
>
> > my $BAR = join "", grep { !m/[\Q$foo\E\s]/ } map { chr($_) } (32..255);
>
> That it would probably get confused by. What do OEQuoteFix and Mozilla do in
> cases like these?
>
> > If you want to do that use: grep -l a*b* *.txt
>
> That's likely to be a challenge to parse.
>
> > The correct formula is a * a + b * b = c * c
>
> This wouldn't present a problem.
>
> > Even with [] and {} you might have some problems. For example, what would
> > happen if I wanted this message to use FTX formatting in a reply to your
> > message? What would your parsing code look like?
>
> It assumes the whole message is formatted the same way. If you change the
> method, it expects you to clean up any problems. This is another reason why
> // and ** might be better than [] and {}.
>
> --Todd
Since you don't think most of the above are problems because they are not on
word boandaries, how do you reconcile that with FTX's support for bolding,
italicizing, or underlining part of a word, such as in the example in the FTX
quick start page? Are you planning on removing that capability?
Posters having to go back and clean up formatting in messages they are
quoting seems like a major inconvenience. No matter what characters FTX
supports.
Brian
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
31 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
