In article <9fq2ra$5ka$1@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net>,
cglur@onwe.co.za writes:
> (Aaron Sloman) wrote:
> Well, my initial polog experiments overly impressed me until I realised
> that elements of: [man in boat] ; are tokens (items for poplog), and NOT
> 'text-strings'. Unfortunately, human knowledge is embedded in text-strings.
<blinks> It is?
I'm not sure what you mean by that. *Some* human knowledge is encoded
in machine-readable text-strings. An aweful lot isn't.
> I want to be able to read text files from various sources/css/formats,
> with some guidance/assistance from string-search facilities.
> And manually extract text-sections to various different holders/files;
> ie. use human evaluation.
>
> Modifying the code below, I was not able to send the alternate (to file
> 'testout') text strings to screen.
> char => ;;; produces <numeric value of char>
`cucharout(aCharacter)` sends the character value [in] `aCharacter` to
the current output stream.
If `myOut` is a variable bound to an output stream (a "character consumer"
in Pop terminology) then, similarly, `myOut(aCharacter)` sends that character
to that output stream.
The default value of `cucharout` sends characters to the "standard output"
than Poplog started with. (It need not be "the screen", since Poplog will
work fine even if all you have is a teletype, or if the output has been
redirected, Unix-style, to a file, socket, serial line, or DAC).
In Ved, working in immediate mode, the default `cucharout` sends characters
to the current output window.
>> define transform_file(inputfile, outputfile);
>> lvars
>> produce = discin(inputfile),
>> consume = discout(outputfile),
>> char;
>>
>> repeat
>> produce() -> char;
>> quitif (char == termin);
>> if char < 128 then consume(char)
>> else
>> ;;; whatever you want to go out, e.g. nothing,
>> ;;; or some translation
>> endif;
>> endrepeat;
>> consume(termin); ;;; to flush output buffer
>> enddefine;
>>
>> Then
>> transform_file('testin', 'testout');
>>
>> will read the file called 'testin' and write the transformed
>> version to 'testout'.
> All this automagically behind the scene eg. opening and closing files, is
> frightening to me .
> Apparently that's what hi-level programming is about ?
That's what *programming* is about: hiding irrelevant details.
Whichy bit was frightening, and can you say why? It may help us to suggest
a good way for you to get into this.
Are any Pop11 books still in print?
--
Chris "I don't like `cucharout`, as it happens" Dollin
C FAQs at: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/by-newsgroup/comp/comp.lang.c.html
|