Deutsch English Français Italiano |
<vdud3e$151ad$6@dont-email.me> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Ruvim <ruvim.pinka@gmail.com> Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth Subject: Re: Parsing timestamps? Date: Sun, 6 Oct 2024 20:15:42 +0400 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 89 Message-ID: <vdud3e$151ad$6@dont-email.me> References: <1f433fabcb4d053d16cbc098dedc6c370608ac01@i2pn2.org> <vdtptd$151ad$1@dont-email.me> <923a7df6941efa78ef7d0629d183cd736f9eb2f5@i2pn2.org> <vdu2vc$151ad$3@dont-email.me> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Sun, 06 Oct 2024 18:15:43 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="e46068a955d916fa6a0f28fb20080d2c"; logging-data="1213773"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/DeSWDV83AjKmu06UsVug0" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:mVQ4dr42qzps2NxdgkSn9PuZLS4= Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: <vdu2vc$151ad$3@dont-email.me> Bytes: 3801 On 2024-10-06 17:22, Ruvim wrote: > On 2024-10-06 15:59, dxf wrote: >> On 6/10/2024 9:48 pm, Ruvim wrote: >>> On 2024-10-06 11:51, dxf wrote: >>>> Is there an easier way of doing this? End goal is a double number >>>> representing centi-secs. >>>> >>>> >>>> empty decimal >>>> >>>> : SPLIT ( a u c -- a2 u2 a3 u3 ) >r 2dup r> scan 2swap 2 pick - ; >>>> : >INT ( adr len -- u ) 0 0 2swap >number 2drop drop ; >>>> >>>> : /T ( a u -- $hour $min $sec ) >>>> 2 0 do [char] : split 2swap dup if 1 /string then loop >>>> 2 0 do dup 0= if 2rot 2rot then loop ; >>>> >>>> : .T 2swap 2rot cr >int . ." hr " >int . ." min " >int . ." sec " ; >>>> >>>> s" 1:2:3" /t .t >>>> s" 02:03" /t .t >>>> s" 03" /t .t >>>> s" 23:59:59" /t .t >>>> s" 0:00:03" /t .t >>> >>> >>> I would use `split-string` factor as: >>> >>> : /t ( sd.time -- sd.hour sd.min sd.sec ) >>> s" :" split-string >>> s" :" split-string >>> ; >>> >>> \ Where >>> >>> : split-string >>> ( sd.text sd.separator -- sd.left sd.right | sd.text 0 0 ) >>> dup >r 3 pick >r ( R: u.[sd.separator][1] addr.[st.text][2] ) >>> search 0= if 2rdrop 0 0 exit then ( addr u ) >>> over r@ - r> swap 2swap r> /string >>> ; >> >> It fails with s" 03". The test case may be unreasonable so I tried >> s" :03" however it also fails. The complication is most tools scan >> from the beginning whereas we would like to scan from the end. > > > You did not provide output for test cases. > > I expect that "03" is equivalent to "03:00:00", which means 3 hours, 0 > minutes, 0 seconds. > And ":03" is equivalent to "00:03:00", which means 0 hours, 3 minutes, 0 > seconds. > > My above implementation for `/t` produces: > > s" 1:2:3" /t .t \ "1 hr 2 min 3 sec" > s" 02:03" /t .t \ "2 hr 3 min 0 sec" > s" 03" /t .t \ "3 hr 0 min 0 sec" > s" :03" /t .t \ "0 hr 3 min 0 sec" > > > What is wrong? Well, I see what you meant. : /t ( sd.time -- sd.hour sd.min sd.sec ) s" :" split-string dup 0= if 2swap 0. 2swap exit then s" :" split-string dup 0= if 2rot 2rot then ; s" 02:03" /t .t \ "0 hr 2 min 3 sec" s" 03" /t .t \ "0 hr 0 min 3 sec" s" :03" /t .t \ "0 hr 0 min 3 sec" Probably, a better interface would be: : parse-time ( sd.time -- u.sec u.min u.hour ) s" :" split-string-last parse-uint -rot s" :" split-string-last parse-uint -rot parse-uint ; -- Ruvim