omigosh -- you're right.
-- Bert
Bert Gunter
"Data is not information. Information is not knowledge. And knowledge
is certainly not wisdom."
-- Clifford Stoll
On Sat, Jul 11, 2015 at 3:31 PM, David Winsemius <dwinsem...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> On Jul 11, 2015, at 3:07 PM, Bert Gunter wrote:
>
>> David/Jeff:
>>
>> Thank you both.
>>
>> You seem to confirm that my observation of an "infelicity" in
>> strsplit() is real. That is most helpful.
>>
>> I found nothing in David's message 2 code that was surprising. That
>> is, the splits shown conform to what I would expect from "\\b" . But
>> not to what I originally showed and David enlarged upon in his first
>> message. I still don't really get why a split should occur at every
>> letter.
>>
>> Jeff may very well have found the explanation, but I have not gone
>> through his code.
>>
>> If the infelicities noted (are there more?) by David and me are not
>> really bugs -- and I would be frankly surprised if they were -- I
>> would suggest that perhaps they deserve mention in the strsplit() man
>> page. Something to the effect that "\b and \< should not be used as
>> split characters..." .
>
> It's more of a regex infelicity or what appears (to us both at a minimum) as
> a violation of a 'least surprise principle':
>
>> gsub("\\b", " ", " This is a test case")
> [1] " T h i s i s a t e s t c a s e "
>
>
> --
> David.
>
>>
>> Bert Gunter
>>
>> "Data is not information. Information is not knowledge. And knowledge
>> is certainly not wisdom."
>> -- Clifford Stoll
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Jul 11, 2015 at 11:05 AM, David Winsemius
>> <dwinsem...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Jul 11, 2015, at 7:47 AM, Bert Gunter wrote:
>>>
>>>> I noticed the following:
>>>>
>>>>> strsplit("red green","\\b")
>>>> [[1]]
>>>> [1] "r" "e" "d" " " "g" "r" "e" "e" "n"
>>>
>>> After reading the ?regex help page, I didn't understand why `\b` would
>>> split within sequences of "word"-characters, either. I expected this to be
>>> the result:
>>>
>>> [[1]]
>>> [1] "red" " " "green"
>>>
>>> There is a warning in that paragraph: "(The interpretation of ‘word’
>>> depends on the locale and implementation.)"
>>>
>>> I got the expected result with only one of "\\>" and "\\<"
>>>
>>>> strsplit("red green","\\<")
>>> [[1]]
>>> [1] "r" "e" "d" " " "g" "r" "e" "e" "n"
>>>
>>>> strsplit("red green","\\>")
>>> [[1]]
>>> [1] "red" " green"
>>>
>>> The result with "\\<" seems decidedly unexpected.
>>>
>>> I'm wondered if the "original" regex documentation uses the same language
>>> as the R help page. So I went to the cited website and find:
>>> =======
>>> An assertion-character can be any of the following:
>>>
>>> • < – Beginning of word
>>> • > – End of word
>>> • b – Word boundary
>>> • B – Non-word boundary
>>> • d – Digit character (equivalent to [[:digit:]])
>>> • D – Non-digit character (equivalent to [^[:digit:]])
>>> • s – Space character (equivalent to [[:space:]])
>>> • S – Non-space character (equivalent to [^[:space:]])
>>> • w – Word character (equivalent to [[:alnum:]_])
>>> • W – Non-word character (equivalent to [^[:alnum:]_])
>>> ========
>>>
>>> The word-"word" appears nowhere else on that page.
>>>
>>>
>>>>> strsplit("red green","\\W")
>>>> [[1]]
>>>> [1] "red" "green"
>>>
>>> `\W` matches the byte-width non-word characters. So the " "-character would
>>> be discarded.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I would have thought that "\\b" should give what "\\W" did. Note that:
>>>>
>>>>> grep("\\bred\\b","red green")
>>>> [1] 1
>>>> ## as expected
>>>>
>>>> Does strsplit use a different regex engine than grep()? Or more
>>>> likely, what am I misunderstanding?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks.
>>>>
>>>> Bert
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> David Winsemius
>>> Alameda, CA, USA
>>>
>
> David Winsemius
> Alameda, CA, USA
>
______________________________________________
R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
