Is this Regular Expression for UTF-8 Correct??
in [MFC]
|
From: Pete Delgado on 19 May 2010 11:52 "Peter Olcott" <NoSpam(a)OCR4Screen.com> wrote in message news:GOadnXHFWbfxbG7WnZ2dnUVZ_tqdnZ2d(a)giganews.com... > On 5/19/2010 12:34 AM, Mihai N. wrote: >> >>> I can't accept this without direct proof. >> >> Yet, we are all supposed to take everything *you* >> say without any proof. >> >> > Please cite examples of what I need to prove. So far no one asked for any > proof. You provide no proof of your numerous performance claims. When pressed, you do cite your own flawed reasoning, but you never provide numerical, verifiable proof of working code - something Joe has asked you to do many times in the hopes that it would help you learn where your assumptions are flawed. Would you like me to refer you to the specific posts or can you take a few moments from your hectic development and newsgroup posting cycle to do the search on your own? -Pete
From: Peter Olcott on 19 May 2010 12:05 On 5/19/2010 10:52 AM, Pete Delgado wrote: > "Peter Olcott"<NoSpam(a)OCR4Screen.com> wrote in message > news:GOadnXHFWbfxbG7WnZ2dnUVZ_tqdnZ2d(a)giganews.com... >> On 5/19/2010 12:34 AM, Mihai N. wrote: >>> >>>> I can't accept this without direct proof. >>> >>> Yet, we are all supposed to take everything *you* >>> say without any proof. >>> >>> >> Please cite examples of what I need to prove. So far no one asked for any >> proof. > > You provide no proof of your numerous performance claims. When pressed, you > do cite your own flawed reasoning, but you never provide numerical, > verifiable proof of working code - something Joe has asked you to do many > times in the hopes that it would help you learn where your assumptions are > flawed. I just posted the complete detailed design of the UTF-8 recognizer. The code will follow within a week. The only thing that needs to be added to this design is the actual code the does the translation from UTF-8 to UTF-32. > > Would you like me to refer you to the specific posts or can you take a few > moments from your hectic development and newsgroup posting cycle to do the > search on your own? > > -Pete > >
From: Oliver Regenfelder on 19 May 2010 12:27 Hello, Peter Olcott wrote: > On 5/19/2010 12:42 AM, Mihai N. wrote: >>> You code in Word? Word is essentially user-hostile for writing code! >> >> Actually, it is very nice. >> >> You set the spelling language to "C" and get nice squiggles for >> all syntax errors. >> ;-) >> >> Also, has the great benefit that it does not compile and run your >> code, which >> allows to write perfect code and create super fast algorithms. >> Compiling the code and running it destroy the perfection :-) >> It's called "reality" and it is a bad thing. >> >> > > It has the benefit of making code easier to read for extensive desk > checking. I can enlarge the font, add bolding, and color high-lighting. > Also this code can be directly embedded in my design notes. This process > works very well for me. This is it. He is either a Troll or leaked from some funky parallel universe. Best regards, Oliver
From: Pete Delgado on 19 May 2010 13:09 "Peter Olcott" <NoSpam(a)OCR4Screen.com> wrote in message news:vOGdnfGVDviykWnWnZ2dnUVZ_rKdnZ2d(a)giganews.com... > On 5/19/2010 10:52 AM, Pete Delgado wrote: >> "Peter Olcott"<NoSpam(a)OCR4Screen.com> wrote in message >> news:GOadnXHFWbfxbG7WnZ2dnUVZ_tqdnZ2d(a)giganews.com... >>> On 5/19/2010 12:34 AM, Mihai N. wrote: >>>> >>>>> I can't accept this without direct proof. >>>> >>>> Yet, we are all supposed to take everything *you* >>>> say without any proof. >>>> >>>> >>> Please cite examples of what I need to prove. So far no one asked for >>> any >>> proof. >> >> You provide no proof of your numerous performance claims. When pressed, >> you >> do cite your own flawed reasoning, but you never provide numerical, >> verifiable proof of working code - something Joe has asked you to do many >> times in the hopes that it would help you learn where your assumptions >> are >> flawed. > > I just posted the complete detailed design of the UTF-8 recognizer. The > code will follow within a week. The only thing that needs to be added to > this design is the actual code the does the translation from UTF-8 to > UTF-32. I'll be happy to look for the code on the 27th! -Pete
From: Peter Olcott on 19 May 2010 13:34
On 5/19/2010 12:09 PM, Pete Delgado wrote: > "Peter Olcott"<NoSpam(a)OCR4Screen.com> wrote in message > news:vOGdnfGVDviykWnWnZ2dnUVZ_rKdnZ2d(a)giganews.com... >> On 5/19/2010 10:52 AM, Pete Delgado wrote: >>> "Peter Olcott"<NoSpam(a)OCR4Screen.com> wrote in message >>> news:GOadnXHFWbfxbG7WnZ2dnUVZ_tqdnZ2d(a)giganews.com... >>>> On 5/19/2010 12:34 AM, Mihai N. wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I can't accept this without direct proof. >>>>> >>>>> Yet, we are all supposed to take everything *you* >>>>> say without any proof. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Please cite examples of what I need to prove. So far no one asked for >>>> any >>>> proof. >>> >>> You provide no proof of your numerous performance claims. When pressed, >>> you >>> do cite your own flawed reasoning, but you never provide numerical, >>> verifiable proof of working code - something Joe has asked you to do many >>> times in the hopes that it would help you learn where your assumptions >>> are >>> flawed. >> >> I just posted the complete detailed design of the UTF-8 recognizer. The >> code will follow within a week. The only thing that needs to be added to >> this design is the actual code the does the translation from UTF-8 to >> UTF-32. > > I'll be happy to look for the code on the 27th! > > -Pete > > It may before then. I learned on a prior job that it is best to under promise and over deliver. |