Services & Resources / Wolfram Forums
-----
 /
MathGroup Archive
2004
*January
*February
*March
*April
*May
*June
*July
*August
*September
*October
*November
*December
*Archive Index
*Ask about this page
*Print this page
*Give us feedback
*Sign up for the Wolfram Insider

MathGroup Archive 2004

[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]

Search the Archive

Re: undocumented function: StringQ

  • To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
  • Subject: [mg47655] Re: undocumented function: StringQ
  • From: sean_incali at yahoo.com (sean kim)
  • Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2004 03:19:20 -0400 (EDT)
  • References: <c603d9$ce3$1@smc.vnet.net>
  • Sender: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com

Hi Dr bob.

your email won't evaluate properly. am i the only one who have this problem? 


StringReplace["lAWyerbillAtsmallfoot.com" // ToLowerCase, Rule @@@ Reverse /@ \
ToLow erCase //@ {{"dR", "lAwyer"}, {"@", "AT"}, {"bIg",
       "small"}, {"bOb", "bill"}}] 

gives me 

StringReplace::srep: ToLow\erCase[{erCase[{erCase[dR], erCase[lAwyer]}], \
erCase[{erCase[@], erCase[AT]}], \[LeftSkeleton]1\[RightSkeleton], \
erCase[{erCase[bOb], erCase[bill]}]}] is not a valid string replacement rule. 

StringReplace[lawyerbillatsmallfoot.com, ToLow erCase[{erCase[{erCase[dR], \
erCase[lAwyer]}], erCase[{erCase[@], erCase[AT]}], erCase[{erCase[bIg], 
            erCase[small]}], erCase[{erCase[bOb], erCase[bill]}]}]]



"DrBob" <drbob at bigfoot.com> wrote in message news:<c603d9$ce3$1 at smc.vnet.net>...
> You'd still have to know you're looking for a function that starts with Str.
> 
> DrBob
> 
> www.eclecticdreams.net
> 
> StringReplace["lAWyerbillAtsmallfoot.com"//ToLowerCase,Rule@@@Reverse/@ToLow
> erCase//@{{"dR","lAwyer"},{"@","AT"},{"bIg","small"},{"bOb","bill"}}]
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bob Hanlon [mailto:bobhanlon at aol.com] 
To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
> Subject: [mg47655] Re: undocumented function: StringQ
> 
> If you type a partial name after "?" (say "?Str") the "Complete Selection"
> key
> shortcut or menu item will offer all defined names such as StringQ for easy
> access to the usage statement.
> 
> 
> Bob Hanlon
> 
> << Subject: [mg47655] Re: undocumented function: StringQ
> From: drbob at bigfoot.com  (Bobby R. Treat)
To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
> 
> >>I just noticed that there is a built-in test StringQ[],
> >> that is not documented in the online help
> 
> You don't mean "online help", you mean on DISK help. Try searching for
> StringQ at Wolfram's online Documentation Center
> http://documents.wolfram.com/ and you'll find hundreds of unrelated
> articles, in addition to a few that actually mention this function. In
> addition, this works:
> 
> ?StringQ
> StringQ[expr] gives True if expr is a string, and False otherwise.
> 
> If you look up String in the Help Browser and look at topics under
> String Manipulation, StringQ isn't listed, and this is what I call
> undocumented: we can't find out about it unless somebody tells us
> about it, we see it in a post like this, et cetera. We can't look it
> up at the Doc Center or use ? unless we know it exists and we know its
> precise name.
> 
> By that definition, there are hundreds, probably thousands of
> undocumented functions and features. Help for complex topics is poorly
> written, too -- apparently by programmers with little or no skill in
> writing for an audience.
> 
> That said, Mathematica is more complex and better documented than
> Visual Basic for Applications, Excel, et cetera, so.... We're lucky.
> 
> Bobby
> 
> Marcus Stollsteimer <marcus314 at yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:<c5o9i7$16q$1 at smc.vnet.net>...
> > Hi,
> > 
> > I just noticed that there is a built-in test StringQ[],
> > that is not documented in the online help.
> > 
> > ?StringQ
> > StringQ[expr] gives True if expr is a string, and False otherwise.
> > 
> > Only a mistake?
> > Is it unsafe to use this function?
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Marcus
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  >><BR><BR>


  • Prev by Date: Re: Kernel crash?
  • Next by Date: Re: Elliptic Curves and Cryptography Questions
  • Previous by thread: Re: undocumented function: StringQ
  • Next by thread: Re: Re: undocumented function: StringQ