digitalmars.D - function escape
- JapA (3/3) Jan 13 2005 char[] function(char[]) escape and unescape
- rev (3/6) Jan 13 2005 Maybe I'm just me incable of understanding "programspeak", but what exac...
- Simon Buchan (10/21) Jan 13 2005 I'm guessing one of:
- Charles (4/28) Jan 14 2005 lol
- Paul Bonser (11/37) Jan 14 2005 I'm gonna have to go with 3. :P
- pragma (16/18) Jan 14 2005 [Way offtopic here, and just for fun...]
- Paul Bonser (7/34) Jan 14 2005 My English teacher in high school told me there are two standards for
- Matthew (3/32) Jan 26 2005 and they are ??
- Les De Ridder (2/14) May 26 2020 Is there a report spam button anywhere on forum.dlang.org?
- Jarrett Billingsley (6/8) Jan 14 2005 Around here, we say "they" for an indefinite third person.
- Paul Bonser (9/22) Jan 14 2005 Okay, I lied about staying out of this topic, but I couldn't resist.
- Simon Buchan (27/49) Jan 14 2005 Note also that from the 'orrible sexist market I currently see, men
- Nick Sabalausky (11/66) Jan 15 2005 I found it funny in Spanish class that the spanish word for "mustache" w...
- Carlos Santander B. (5/8) Jan 15 2005 Sorry, dude, but "bigote" is male. (mustache is the hair that grows on
- Nick Sabalausky (4/12) Jan 16 2005 Hmm, maybe it was "beard". Either that or my teacher just didn't know wh...
- Carlos Santander B. (4/7) Jan 16 2005 Now you're correct: "barba" is female.
-
Matthew
(7/9)
Jan 26 2005
along with 'election' and 'environment' ??
- Matthew (4/12) Jan 26 2005 I say 'one'.
- Unknown W. Brackets (18/34) Jan 15 2005 I'll take a stab and guess he or she is looking for functions which
- Paul Bonser (5/13) Jan 15 2005 Ahah! I bet that that's what he was saying...of course, he'll probably
- Unknown W. Brackets (6/11) Jan 16 2005 I'm afraid that's probably so, although I meant no mal-intent and I
- Mr. Monkey (6/6) Jan 16 2005 I'm sorry for vagueness.
char[] function(char[]) escape and unescape "escaped\tstring\n" -->"escaped\\tstring\\n"
Jan 13 2005
In article <cs67ip$2rnk$1 digitaldaemon.com>, JapA says...char[] function(char[]) escape and unescape "escaped\tstring\n" -->"escaped\\tstring\\n"Maybe I'm just me incable of understanding "programspeak", but what exactly are you trying to say?
Jan 13 2005
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 04:48:42 +0000 (UTC), rev <rev_member pathlink.com> wrote:In article <cs67ip$2rnk$1 digitaldaemon.com>, JapA says...I'm guessing one of: 1) a function is escaping a string he didn't want it to (unlikely) 2) he wants a function that will (use `strings like this` (non-shifted ~, under esc) for completley literal string, I would love to see the function that does it the other way around) 3) He's a monkey that randomly typed something -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/char[] function(char[]) escape and unescape "escaped\tstring\n" -->"escaped\\tstring\\n"Maybe I'm just me incable of understanding "programspeak", but what exactly are you trying to say?
Jan 13 2005
"Charles" <no email.com> lol "Simon Buchan" <buchan.home ihug.co.nz> wrote in message news:opskk1bud6stcuho simon...On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 04:48:42 +0000 (UTC), rev <rev_member pathlink.com> wrote:functionIn article <cs67ip$2rnk$1 digitaldaemon.com>, JapA says...I'm guessing one of: 1) a function is escaping a string he didn't want it to (unlikely) 2) he wants a function that will (use `strings like this` (non-shifted ~, under esc) for completley literal string, I would love to see thechar[] function(char[]) escape and unescape "escaped\tstring\n" -->"escaped\\tstring\\n"Maybe I'm just me incable of understanding "programspeak", but what exactly are you trying to say?that does it the other way around) 3) He's a monkey that randomly typed something -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
Jan 14 2005
Simon Buchan wrote:On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 04:48:42 +0000 (UTC), rev <rev_member pathlink.com> wrote:I'm gonna have to go with 3. :P Actually, maybe he was asking was for the ability to have a certain function called when an escape sequence is used in a string? Perhaps we're all sexist for assuming it's a he? Or perhaps the English language is to blame for not having gender-free pronouns... Yes, I indeed now believe that it was really just an indirect criticism of the English language by example... Okay, enough crack for me... -Paul B.In article <cs67ip$2rnk$1 digitaldaemon.com>, JapA says...I'm guessing one of: 1) a function is escaping a string he didn't want it to (unlikely) 2) he wants a function that will (use `strings like this` (non-shifted ~, under esc) for completley literal string, I would love to see the function that does it the other way around) 3) He's a monkey that randomly typed somethingchar[] function(char[]) escape and unescape "escaped\tstring\n" -->"escaped\\tstring\\n"Maybe I'm just me incable of understanding "programspeak", but what exactly are you trying to say?
Jan 14 2005
In article <cs9904$1kc$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Paul Bonser says...Or perhaps the English language is to blame for not having gender-free pronouns...[Way offtopic here, and just for fun...] Well, we do have "it" and "its", but for some reason they're concidered "rude" (almost derogatory) when used in reference to a person. At best "it" would accurately describe a hemaphrodite, which would be exceedingly unlikely to be accurate since among what few hemaphrodites exist, most proclaim a gender to avoid such problems anyway. The closest "polite" form we have is "he/she" which is, sadly, a lingustic kludge at best. And don't even get me started on the "alternating pronoun gender every other paragraph" thing; man, that stuff gets confusing. :) (I wonder if somewhere there's a newsgroup full of english teachers, journalists and Phd's attempting to develop an evolved/improved English-like language ... hrm) As to the original content: I haven't a clue as to what that's about. Pragma - ericanderton at yahoo
Jan 14 2005
pragma wrote:In article <cs9904$1kc$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Paul Bonser says...My English teacher in high school told me there are two standards for gender-free pronouns, both use by a few College professors. I wonder what kind of "English Standards Agency" there is or whatnot? I want to see the ANSI Recommendation for the English standard version 1.5 :) Okay, Sorry all, I'm done with this thread...maybe. -PIB.Or perhaps the English language is to blame for not having gender-free pronouns...[Way offtopic here, and just for fun...] Well, we do have "it" and "its", but for some reason they're concidered "rude" (almost derogatory) when used in reference to a person. At best "it" would accurately describe a hemaphrodite, which would be exceedingly unlikely to be accurate since among what few hemaphrodites exist, most proclaim a gender to avoid such problems anyway. The closest "polite" form we have is "he/she" which is, sadly, a lingustic kludge at best. And don't even get me started on the "alternating pronoun gender every other paragraph" thing; man, that stuff gets confusing. :) (I wonder if somewhere there's a newsgroup full of english teachers, journalists and Phd's attempting to develop an evolved/improved English-like language ... hrm) As to the original content: I haven't a clue as to what that's about. Pragma - ericanderton at yahoo
Jan 14 2005
"Paul Bonser" <misterpib gmail.com> wrote in message news:cs9e3s$7nq$1 digitaldaemon.com...pragma wrote:and they are ?? I wonderIn article <cs9904$1kc$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Paul Bonser says...My English teacher in high school told me there are two standards for gender-free pronouns, both use by a few College professors.Or perhaps the English language is to blame for not having gender-free pronouns...[Way offtopic here, and just for fun...] Well, we do have "it" and "its", but for some reason they're concidered "rude" (almost derogatory) when used in reference to a person. At best "it" would accurately describe a hemaphrodite, which would be exceedingly unlikely to be accurate since among what few hemaphrodites exist, most proclaim a gender to avoid such problems anyway. The closest "polite" form we have is "he/she" which is, sadly, a lingustic kludge at best. And don't even get me started on the "alternating pronoun gender every other paragraph" thing; man, that stuff gets confusing. :) (I wonder if somewhere there's a newsgroup full of english teachers, journalists and Phd's attempting to develop an evolved/improved English-like language ... hrm) As to the original content: I haven't a clue as to what that's about. Pragma - ericanderton at yahoowhat kind of "English Standards Agency" there is or whatnot? I want to see the ANSI Recommendation for the English standard version 1.5 :) Okay, Sorry all, I'm done with this thread...maybe. -PIB.
Jan 26 2005
On Tuesday, 26 May 2020 at 10:55:32 UTC, Miguel A. Pillar wrote:On Friday, 14 January 2005 at 21:38:05 UTC, Paul Bonser wrote:Is there a report spam button anywhere on forum.dlang.org?pragma wrote: My English teacher in high school told me there are two standards for gender-free pronouns, both use by a few College professors. I wonder what kind of "English Standards Agency" there is or whatnot? I want to see the ANSI Recommendation for the English standard version 1.5 :) -PIB.I have always failed topic on pronouns. This has always caused me troubles when writing essays, I need to have my essays edited on https://www.achieveessays.com before final submission to my English teacher.
May 26 2020
The closest "polite" form we have is "he/she" which is, sadly, a lingustic kludge at best.Around here, we say "they" for an indefinite third person. Something I also can't get my head around - spoken language has been around much longer than written language, yes? Then why are there two distinctly separate sets of rules for spoken and written English? Shouldn't the written language reflect the spoken? No, apparently not - we always have to use "one" in our papers, when no one says "one." Confusing.
Jan 14 2005
Jarrett Billingsley wrote:Okay, I lied about staying out of this topic, but I couldn't resist. The word "they" is plural, and therefore semantically wrong for this kind of use. I found some sites with some info on ones that seem almost suitable.. http://footnotes.jinkies.org.uk/pronouns.html http://www.aetherlumina.com/gnp/ Okay, I should leave this alone now :) -PIBThe closest "polite" form we have is "he/she" which is, sadly, a lingustic kludge at best.Around here, we say "they" for an indefinite third person. Something I also can't get my head around - spoken language has been around much longer than written language, yes? Then why are there two distinctly separate sets of rules for spoken and written English? Shouldn't the written language reflect the spoken? No, apparently not - we always have to use "one" in our papers, when no one says "one." Confusing.
Jan 14 2005
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 19:05:10 -0800, Paul Bonser <misterpib gmail.com> wrote:Jarrett Billingsley wrote:Note also that from the 'orrible sexist market I currently see, men outnumber women by at LEAST 10 : 1 in programming. One is a little to vauge, not to mention a bit Brittish Upper-Class™ (Can't beleive I remember the key-stroke for that). He/She is terrible. (I would probbably rather be called She that He/She, anyway) Alternating is asking for trouble. They, as said, is plural. It, likewise, is considered demeaning. As a side note, the only acceptable genderless singular pronoun for a sophont (The more PC term for sentient, cause animals feel too <roll eyes/>) I've heard is Ve, which is in fact for beings where the idea of gender are irrelevant, like programs. Go figure. Don't lose hope, though, with any luck, the Americans will totally factor out gender from the language, and we already got rid of (most) gendered inanimite objects, as in French. (Other 'Romance' languages, too? (As in, derived from Roman, not because they're romantic :P)) BTW, sorry if I come across as trying to hand out knowledge from on high... guess it's just natural when your just so damn smart ];) -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/Okay, I lied about staying out of this topic, but I couldn't resist. The word "they" is plural, and therefore semantically wrong for this kind of use. I found some sites with some info on ones that seem almost suitable.. http://footnotes.jinkies.org.uk/pronouns.html http://www.aetherlumina.com/gnp/ Okay, I should leave this alone now :) -PIBThe closest "polite" form we have is "he/she" which is, sadly, a lingustic kludge at best.Around here, we say "they" for an indefinite third person. Something I also can't get my head around - spoken language has been around much longer than written language, yes? Then why are there two distinctly separate sets of rules for spoken and written English? Shouldn't the written language reflect the spoken? No, apparently not - we always have to use "one" in our papers, when no one says "one." Confusing.
Jan 14 2005
I found it funny in Spanish class that the spanish word for "mustache" was considered female :). As for an ungendered pronoun, I like to just take the male pronouns as being androgonus. I think there's already precidents: - Nobody says "actress" anymore. They're all just "actors" now. - Not a lot of people use the pc versions of many other job titles like "garbagemen", "firemen". - "One small step for man, one giant leap for mankind" was probably not referring to males alone. "Simon Buchan" <buchan.home ihug.co.nz> wrote in message news:opskmtoqwestcuho simon...On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 19:05:10 -0800, Paul Bonser <misterpib gmail.com> wrote:Jarrett Billingsley wrote:Note also that from the 'orrible sexist market I currently see, men outnumber women by at LEAST 10 : 1 in programming. One is a little to vauge, not to mention a bit Brittish Upper-ClassT (Can't beleive I remember the key-stroke for that). He/She is terrible. (I would probbably rather be called She that He/She, anyway) Alternating is asking for trouble. They, as said, is plural. It, likewise, is considered demeaning. As a side note, the only acceptable genderless singular pronoun for a sophont (The more PC term for sentient, cause animals feel too <roll eyes/>) I've heard is Ve, which is in fact for beings where the idea of gender are irrelevant, like programs. Go figure. Don't lose hope, though, with any luck, the Americans will totally factor out gender from the language, and we already got rid of (most) gendered inanimite objects, as in French. (Other 'Romance' languages, too? (As in, derived from Roman, not because they're romantic :P)) BTW, sorry if I come across as trying to hand out knowledge from on high... guess it's just natural when your just so damn smart ];) -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/Okay, I lied about staying out of this topic, but I couldn't resist. The word "they" is plural, and therefore semantically wrong for this kind of use. I found some sites with some info on ones that seem almost suitable.. http://footnotes.jinkies.org.uk/pronouns.html http://www.aetherlumina.com/gnp/ Okay, I should leave this alone now :) -PIBThe closest "polite" form we have is "he/she" which is, sadly, a lingustic kludge at best.Around here, we say "they" for an indefinite third person. Something I also can't get my head around - spoken language has been around much longer than written language, yes? Then why are there two distinctly separate sets of rules for spoken and written English? Shouldn't the written language reflect the spoken? No, apparently not - we always have to use "one" in our papers, when no one says "one." Confusing.
Jan 15 2005
Nick Sabalausky wrote:I found it funny in Spanish class that the spanish word for "mustache" was considered female :).Sorry, dude, but "bigote" is male. (mustache is the hair that grows on the upper lip, right?). You must've been thinking about something else. _______________________ Carlos Santander Bernal
Jan 15 2005
Hmm, maybe it was "beard". Either that or my teacher just didn't know what she was talking about - which is entirely possible. "Carlos Santander B." <csantander619 gmail.com> wrote in message news:csc6kb$7nt$1 digitaldaemon.com...Nick Sabalausky wrote:I found it funny in Spanish class that the spanish word for "mustache" was considered female :).Sorry, dude, but "bigote" is male. (mustache is the hair that grows on the upper lip, right?). You must've been thinking about something else. _______________________ Carlos Santander Bernal
Jan 16 2005
Nick Sabalausky wrote:Hmm, maybe it was "beard". Either that or my teacher just didn't know what she was talking about - which is entirely possible.Now you're correct: "barba" is female. _______________________ Carlos Santander Bernal
Jan 16 2005
Carlos Santander B. wrote:Nick Sabalausky wrote:Just to add something to this linguistic thread: barba it's the same in Italian, name and gender... and "baffi" is male gender:) Byez:) CarotinhoHmm, maybe it was "beard". Either that or my teacher just didn't know what she was talking about - which is entirely possible.Now you're correct: "barba" is female.
Jan 16 2005
"Carlos Santander B." <csantander619 gmail.com> wrote in message news:cse781$27vm$1 digitaldaemon.com...Nick Sabalausky wrote:That's even funnier than moustache!Hmm, maybe it was "beard". Either that or my teacher just didn't know what she was talking about - which is entirely possible.Now you're correct: "barba" is female.
Jan 26 2005
Don't lose hope, though, with any luck, the Americans will totally factor out gender from the language,along with 'election' and 'environment' ?? <CG> Ok, fire away ... ... but before you do, note that, being a UK and Australian citizen, I acknowledge that our political/cultural/social/environmental systems are just about as f'ed up as that of the US. It's just that a lot fewer people care (~80 million, as opposed to ~ 6.2 billion). Ain't the world turning out peachy? :-( Matthew
Jan 26 2005
"Jarrett Billingsley" <kb3ctd2 yahoo.com> wrote in message news:cs9v4m$pc8$1 digitaldaemon.com...I say 'one'. But, since I live in Australia, I get a _lot_ of strange looks. :-)The closest "polite" form we have is "he/she" which is, sadly, a lingustic kludge at best.Around here, we say "they" for an indefinite third person. Something I also can't get my head around - spoken language has been around much longer than written language, yes? Then why are there two distinctly separate sets of rules for spoken and written English? Shouldn't the written language reflect the spoken? No, apparently not - we always have to use "one" in our papers, when no one says "one." Confusing.
Jan 26 2005
I'll take a stab and guess he or she is looking for functions which
emulate the addslashes and stripslashes functions in PHP. Example:
echo addslashes("don't");
don\'t
echo stripslashes("don\\'t");
don't
Please note that these are *runtime* functions, nothing like the
functionality of backticks in D. The main use for this would be, I
suppose, SQL (as in PHP.) For example:
char[] querystring = "
SELECT column
FROM table
WHERE othercolumn = '" ~ std.string.escape(value) ~ "'
LIMIT 1";
I'm no oracle though, so I could be wrong - this person *could* just be
a monkey, I suppose, as suggested by Simon Buchan. But, I'm guessing
not - mostly because I don't think the typewriters they use have
brackets. I'm probably wrong about that, though.
-[Unknown]
-------- Original Message --------
In article <cs67ip$2rnk$1 digitaldaemon.com>, JapA says...
char[] function(char[]) escape and unescape
"escaped\tstring\n"
-->"escaped\\tstring\\n"
Maybe I'm just me incable of understanding "programspeak", but what exactly are
you trying to say?
Jan 15 2005
Unknown W. Brackets wrote:
I'll take a stab and guess he or she is looking for functions which
emulate the addslashes and stripslashes functions in PHP. Example:
echo addslashes("don't");
> don\'t
echo stripslashes("don\\'t");
> don't
Ahah! I bet that that's what he was saying...of course, he'll probably
never confirm it now that we've most likely embarrassed him away from
the board, you think?
-PIB
Jan 15 2005
I'm afraid that's probably so, although I meant no mal-intent and I don't think he did much wrong, except maybe be a bit vague - possibly not a primary English speaker. Oh well. If you're reading this, don't worry, no big deal about verbosity in my book. -[Unknown]Ahah! I bet that that's what he was saying...of course, he'll probably never confirm it now that we've most likely embarrassed him away from the board, you think? -PIB
Jan 16 2005
I'm sorry for vagueness.
//How about this?
char[] quote(char[] s,int style=0);
char[] unquote(char[] s,int style=0);
assert(
quote("Are\tyou\nmonkey?")=="\"Are\\tyou\\nmonkey?\"");
Jan 16 2005