[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: regexp filter to match non-english characters

From: Robert D. Crawford
Subject: Re: regexp filter to match non-english characters
Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2008 14:41:30 -0600
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux)

Hello Ted.  Thanks for all the work.  See below for comments.

Ted Zlatanov <> writes:

> On Thu, 06 Nov 2008 10:43:38 -0600 "Robert D. Crawford" <> 
> wrote: 
> RDC> Score files are great.  Truth be told, I'm just looking for what works.
> RDC> I like your solution but it will exclude posts with unicode characters,
> RDC> which is something I would like to avoid if possible.
> OK, so the question now is "how to tell if a character is in the Asian
> Unicode character ranges."  Unfortunately I recall Emacs' own character
> database will misrepresent some Latin characters, so I wouldn't depend
> on character properties.
> I looked at and picked
> the blocks that looked useful.

[snip long code]

> Evaluating this (you have to load the 'cl library too) gives
> "[^\\u0D00-\\u0D7F\\u0D80-\\u0DFF\\u0E00-\\u0E7F\\u0E80-\\u0EFF\\u0F00-\\u0FFF\\u1000-\\u109F\\u1780-\\u17FF\\u1800-\\u18AF\\u1900-\\u194F\\u1950-\\u197F\\u1980-\\u19DF\\u19E0-\\u19FF\\u1A00-\\u1A1F\\u1B00-\\u1B7F\\u2E80-\\u2EFF\\u2F00-\\u2FDF\\u2FF0-\\u2FFF\\u3000-\\u303F\\u3040-\\u309F\\u30A0-\\u30FF\\u3100-\\u312F\\u3130-\\u318F\\u3190-\\u319F\\u31A0-\\u31BF\\u31C0-\\u31EF\\u31F0-\\u31FF\\u3200-\\u32FF\\u3300-\\u33FF\\u3400-\\u4DBF\\u4DC0-\\u4DFF\\u4E00-\\u9FFF\\uA000-\\uA48F\\uA490-\\uA4CF\\uAC00-\\uD7AF\\uF900-\\uFAFF]"
> I don't know if this is good enough for you, but the ranges are correct
> at least and you see how you can add more.  I tested with a few
> characters like this:
> (string-match (zme) "helloà´€")
> and it seems to work OK.  In a score file you'll have only one backslash
> but otherwise it should work.

I tested with this:


and it returns nil.  Great!

Testing with the unicode character » (C-q 273 RET) returns 0.  Curses.

Thank you for all your help.  This has been way more difficult than I
thought it would be.  Considering that, if you don't feel the need to
continue, I agree.  Some would take this as a personal challenge to make
it work.  I however have other things to do than to track down why this
regexp doesn't work.  I can't spend time on it and I surely don't expect
you to do so either.

Thanks again, but I think I'll be hitting C-k and saving my time for
other things.

Robert D. Crawford                            

        "I only touch base with reality on an as-needed basis!"

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]