Re: Sorting - lower to upper

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
•Re^2: Sorting - lower to upper by merlyn (Sage) on Jul 15, 2004 at 19:14 UTC
That'll make duplicate copies of everything that doesn't begin with a letter. Maybe you want to narrow those regexen down a bit. -- Randal L. Schwartz, Perl hacker Be sure to read my standard disclaimer if this is a reply. update: Oops, confused `[^a-z]` with `^[a-z]`. So yes, everything without a letter will be absent, not duplicated. Doesn't change that there's something wrong with this solution.	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^3: Sorting - lower to upper by Roy Johnson (Monsignor) on Jul 15, 2004 at 20:29 UTC
Seems to me that it should leave out anything that doesn't begin with a letter. Given the specs, that may or may not be desirable. We're not really tightening our belts, it just feels that way because we're getting fatter.	[reply]
Re^3: Sorting - lower to upper by perldeveloper (Scribe) on Jul 15, 2004 at 20:37 UTC
It seems to me that rather than duplicate all non-first-lettered-words (nice hyphenate don't you think?), it actually discards all these words. I mean, the first list sorts all words which start with a small-case and the second list sorts all the first-upper-cased-words. I would appreciate explanation. Update: It seems that my pertinent and correct remark was voted down at least two times. I wonder what that means.	[reply]
Re^4: Sorting - lower to upper by Roy Johnson (Monsignor) on Jul 16, 2004 at 13:22 UTC
It seems that my pertinent and correct remark was voted down at least two times. I wonder what that means. It doesn't necessarily mean anything, apart from the fact that there are some jackasses around. Downvotes are the most contentious and least useful feature of PerlMonks. We're not really tightening our belts, it just feels that way because we're getting fatter.	[reply]


good chemistry is complicated, and a little bit messy -LW
	PerlMonks