Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!pasteur!ames!ig!arizona!rupley
From: rupley@arizona.edu (John Rupley)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: C comment stripper
Summary: It's neat and works
Message-ID: <9893@megaron.arizona.edu>
Date: 26 Mar 89 20:59:35 GMT
References: <1842@viper.Lynx.MN.Org> <9543@smoke.BRL.MIL> <1453@wpi.wpi.edu> <16539@mimsy.UUCP>
Organization: U of Arizona CS Dept, Tucson
Lines: 35


> In article <16539@mimsy.UUCP>, chris@mimsy.UUCP (Chris Torek) writes:
> In article <9864@megaron.arizona.edu> rupley@arizona.edu (John Rupley) writes:
> >Score, anyone? (recent postings tested on K&R-I-syntax code)
> >
> >	sed        1/1 correct
> >	Lex        2/2 correct
> >	C          2/2 wrong
> 
> This sounds like a CHALLENGE!  :-)

Unclear again (sob :-).  Meant it as a comment, implying the VIRTUES of
Lex (and even sed :-) for pattern matching.  Contest-wise, your C code
is the first correct as initially posted, it runs faster than the previous
postings (after correction of the latter), and one can follow the neat
state-machine implementation at first reading.

> I wrote the following working against the ten-minute spaghetti clock.

Wow! It took me longer to test it.

For what its worth (as COMMENTARY -- please, no contest), counting new
postings, too:

      sed, awk        2/3 correct as first posted (test vs K&R-I-type code)
      Lex             2/3 
      C               1/3

Hmmm.  Conclusion?  The probability of any particular piece of code being
correct is independent of language and is a toss-up (:-)?  

But I still like Lex for this particular type of problem.

John Rupley
rupley!local@megaron.arizona.edu