Mathematica 9 is now available
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: Re: undocumented function: StringQ

  • To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
  • Subject: [mg47669] Re: [mg47655] Re: undocumented function: StringQ
  • From: János <janos.lobb at yale.edu>
  • Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2004 05:23:06 -0400 (EDT)
  • References: <c603d9$ce3$1@smc.vnet.net> <200404200719.DAA27869@smc.vnet.net>
  • Sender: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com

On Apr 20, 2004, at 3:19 AM, sean kim wrote:

> 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",

ToLow erCase =!= ToLowerCase :)

János
>        "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
> To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
>> Subject: [mg47669] [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: [mg47669] [mg47655] Re: undocumented function: StringQ
>> From: drbob at bigfoot.com  (Bobby R. Treat)
To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
> 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>
>
>
-------------------------------------------------
clear perl code is better than unclear awk code; but NOTHING comes  
close to unclear perl code
http://www.faqs.org/faqs/computer-lang/awk/faq/


  • Prev by Date: RE: Re: undocumented function: StringQ
  • Next by Date: Re: Subscript Variable
  • Previous by thread: Re: undocumented function: StringQ
  • Next by thread: RE: Re: undocumented function: StringQ