Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Clear questions and runnable code
get the best and fastest answer
 
PerlMonks  

Re: Re: Re: Re: New Gathering section?

by KM (Priest)
on Jan 10, 2001 at 01:31 UTC ( #50784=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re: Re: Re: New Gathering section?
in thread New Gathering section?

Just requested..

Cheers,
KM


Comment on Re: Re: Re: Re: New Gathering section?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: New Gathering section?
by extremely (Priest) on Jan 10, 2001 at 03:45 UTC
    Sweet! Now we need a MonkMongers or PMPM section and gathering requests by locale or location will be on-topic there. Up until now, we've been using the chatter-box to sort these things out here in Louisville. =)

    Update: for goodnesssake, ++ danger for the post below!

    --
    $you = new YOU;
    honk() if $you->love(perl)

      <html>

      Hmmm, Perl Mongers have always had a regex version of their name to take into account both Mongers and Mungers:

      /Perl M[ou]ngers/ # char class version /Perl M(o|u)ngers/ # alternation version

      Relatively easy to match the right people. But if we mix up Mongers, Mungers, and Monks all in one place we will have a less gracefull time of matching desirable PM variants. I mean, we'll most certainly want to match any of these:

      Perl Mongers Perl Mungers Perl Monks

      But this permissiveness certainly shouldn't extend to those who refer to themselves as:

      Perl Munks Perl Mungs Perl Mongs Perl Monkers Perl Munkers

      So the question is, what can we come up with that retains the simple elegance of /Perl M(o|u)ngers/ (or its character class equivelant) and ensures that we aren't matching one of the more hideous deviants?

      Well, a couple of obvious attempts might be:

      ( /Perl M[ou]ngers/ || /Perl Monks/ ) /Perl (?:M[ou]ngers|Monks)/

      Aaack! Just look at all those duplicated letters going to waste!

      /Perl M(?:onk|[ou]nger)s/

      Bletch, still pretty ugly -- and look, both the 'o' and the 'n' are still wastefully repeated on both sides of the alternation (as if we had an endless supply of ascii letters, sheesh!). This simply won't do. Therefore, in my humble opinion, our only option in this matter is to screw simplicity and elegance and go for the minimum alphabetical liability:

      /Perl M(?:(o)|(u))n(?(2)(g)|(?:(g)|(k)))(?(5)|er)s/;

      Much better, don't you think? And only one extra 'g' wasted. Now, before you start screaming about how this will deplete our supply of much needed parentheses, don't panic -- rumour has it, Larry Wall been secretly siphoning off parentheses from old Lisp programs for years! (sshhh).

      .

      (just(another(perl(wacko))))

           /Perl M(?:(o)|(u))n(?(2)(g)|(?:(g)|(k)))(?(5)|er)s/;
        Only one extra 'g' wasted? What about the two occurences of 'er'?! As one of the most common digrams in the English language; we need to conserve it as much as possible! /P(er)l M(?:(o)|(u))n(?(3)(g)|(?:(g)|(k)))(?(6)|\1)s/;
        :)

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://50784]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others drinking their drinks and smoking their pipes about the Monastery: (7)
As of 2014-10-01 09:35 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    How do you remember the number of days in each month?











    Results (392 votes), past polls