Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Think about Loose Coupling
 
PerlMonks  

Re: Huge simple problem

by dreadpiratepeter (Priest)
on Aug 05, 2009 at 22:43 UTC ( #786247=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Huge simple problem

May I suggest that you learn to use the foreach loop in Perl, rather than the c-style for loop.

my @searchTexts = split (/and|or/i,$query); foreach my $text (@searchtexts) { $text =~ s/^\s+//; $text =~ s/\s+$//; print "$text\n"; }
and in a loop this simple I would just use $_
foreach (split /and|or/i,$query) { s/^\s*(.*?)\s*$/$1/; print "$_\n"; }
or reduce it even further with a map and a join (depends on circumstance, if I'm the not only maintainer I'd probably use the above version)
print join("\n",map {/^\s*(.*?)\s*$/;$1} split(/and|or/i,$query)) . "\ +n";
all the above code is untested.

update: also you could first clean the ends of $query (with s/^\s*(.*?)\s*$/). Then if you change the slip condition to /\s*(?:and|or)\s*/ you can skip the map:
print join("n\",split(/\s*(?:and|or)\s*/,$query)) . "\n";
of course at this point you can skip the whole split and use:
$query =~ s/\s*(?:and|or)\s*/\n/g; print "$query\n";
A final note, all these will fail horribly if your data has and/or imbedded in words. ie world. You probably want to split on /\s+(?:and|or)\s+/ or /\s*\b(?:and|or)\b\s*/

Phew, now I need a nap


-pete
"Worry is like a rocking chair. It gives you something to do, but it doesn't get you anywhere."


Comment on Re: Huge simple problem
Select or Download Code
Re^2: Huge simple problem
by Anonymous Monk on Aug 05, 2009 at 23:07 UTC
    Thanks for the help!
Re^2: Huge simple problem
by dsheroh (Parson) on Aug 06, 2009 at 00:04 UTC
    May I suggest that you learn to use the foreach loop in Perl, rather than the c-style for loop.

    Do note that foreach is just an alternate spelling of for. for my $text (@searchtexts) { ... } is exactly equivalent to foreach my $text (@searchtexts) { ... }.

    Either way, though, I can't remember the last time I used a C-style for loop in Perl. for ( [list] ) is so much nicer and avoids all those nasty off-by-one errors.

      I second this advice, and (missingthepoint posting anonymously), ++ to you both for helpful replies (when I remember what I changed my password to).

      Also, may I suggest you use strict and use warnings? (put those two lines at the top of your code). It will save you a lot of time - I speak from painful experience :|

      One final word: it appears as though you're trying to get the number of elements in @a by writing @a +1 -1. That's contorted - you can just say $i <= @a, since <= puts its operands (that is, $i and @a) in scalar context, and for the array, produces the number of elements it contains.

      You can improve that even further, too. As it stands you have an off-by-one error - looping from $i = 0 to $i = @array<c> will put you one element beyond the end. If you need a C-style for loop, you can write: <c>for ($i = 0; $i < @a; $i++) { ... and be done with it. :)

      But in your situation, you would be better served just doing what dsheroh++ said and using a plain for: for my $element (@a) { <do something with element> ...

      Don't hesitate to let me know if that was unclear. :)

        ... and you already noticed (part of) that. Never mind, hopefully someone else benefits from that node.
      I always say foreach when doing (@a) type loops and for when doing c-style loops. helps make the code a little more self-documenting


      -pete
      "Worry is like a rocking chair. It gives you something to do, but it doesn't get you anywhere."

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://786247]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others exploiting the Monastery: (14)
As of 2014-08-21 19:23 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    The best computer themed movie is:











    Results (143 votes), past polls