From: haskell-cafe-bounces@haskell.org [mailto:haskell-cafe-bounces@haskell.org] On Behalf Of Paolino

...

I'd start by not sextuple-posting, it just sextuples the

ugliness ;-) Mhh, still I don't see any them in my inbox mails , probably something buggy in gmail configuration, sorry :/.

Are you expecting to see your sent message eventually arrive in your inbox? gmail doesn't do that by default (and I don't see an obvious setting to change it). gmail seems to be fairly keen on removing duplicate messages. Alistair ***************************************************************** Confidentiality Note: The information contained in this message, and any attachments, may contain confidential and/or privileged material. It is intended solely for the person(s) or entity to which it is addressed. Any review, retransmission, dissemination, or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient(s) is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. *****************************************************************

On 30/03/07, Bayley, Alistair wrote:

...

Mhh, still I don't see any them in my inbox mails , probably something buggy in gmail configuration, sorry :/.

Are you expecting to see your sent message eventually arrive in your inbox? gmail doesn't do that by default (and I don't see an obvious setting to change it). gmail seems to be fairly keen on removing duplicate messages.

The ML software has the option of not sending you your own messages, but I can't remember if it is on by default or not. Cheers, Dougal.

On Friday 30 March 2007 06:59, Stefan O'Rear wrote:

Anyway, I think parsec is *far* too big a hammer for the nail you're trying to hit.

In the end , the big hammer solution has become parseLine = fmap (map fst. filter snd) $ many parser where parser = do w <- option ("",False) parseAWord anyChar -- skip the separator return w parseAWord = try positive <|> (many1 nonSeparator >> return ("",False)) positive = do c <- wordChar (cs,tn) <- option ("",True) parseAWord return (c:cs,tn) wordChar = letter <|> oneOf "_@" <?> "a word-character" nonSeparator = wordChar <|> digit <?> "a non-separator" while your, corrected not parsec solution is wordsOfLine isNonSeparator isWordChar = (filter (all isWordChar)). groupBy (\x y -> (isNonSeparator x) == (isNonSeparator y)) Still ,I wonder if the parsec solution can be simplified. Thanks. (PS. I put an option on the ML software which sends me an ack on posting , so at least I know I sent the mail :) )