Regular Expression to Replace UPPER Case Text with lower case text

Discussion in 'Perl Misc' started by penny, Feb 18, 2008.

  1. cc> You have completely misunderstood what I said. The people I
    cc> mentioned are not idiots, they're simply ignorant. These
    cc> people have well paying, responsible jobs, but the jobs are
    cc> MANAGEMENT jobs, not technical or engineering jobs. Typically
    cc> they have a business degree with one course in VB and one
    cc> course in SQL, and they are convinced that they know
    cc> everything there is to know about technology. Why? Because
    cc> their opinions have been validated again and again by real
    cc> world experience. Again, this is managerial and business
    cc> experience, not engineering or technical experience. These are
    cc> bankers and marketers and insurance executives, not
    cc> programmers or software engineers.

    You seem to think that "he's an idiot" can be countered by "but he's
    not a programmer or a software engineer." Technical management is
    equal parts technical knowledge and management knowledge, which is why
    it's so often done poorly.

    cc> In the first place, they aren't idiots but middle and uppermid
    cc> level managers who have done well in their careers.

    You also seem to think that "he's an idiot" can be countered by "he's
    done well in his career." Examples of successful idiots abound;
    you've even offered a number of anecdotes yourself.

    cc> In the second place, I evangelize my beliefs, which basically
    cc> are Perl and Python in a BSD or Linux server connected to a
    cc> Postgres or MySQL DB served up by Apache.

    You do a very poor job of evangelizing for Perl if you're advising
    people that (a) they'll be laughed at for using it and (b) it's best
    avoided, as it's 1980s technology.

    Charlton Wilbur, Feb 20, 2008
    1. Advertisements

  2. penny

    ccc31807 Guest

    Not at all. 'Idiot' means someone with a very, very low IQ, a retarded
    person. 'Ignorant' simply means lacking information. It shouldn't
    surprise you that someone who spent all his career on the business
    side lacks knowledge and experience on the technical side.
    Again, no. A successful person isn't an idiot. He may do idiotic
    things, he may be ignorant in certain knowledge domains, but he isn't
    an idiot.
    (a) In some circumstances, you ~will~ be laughed at for using
    particular technologies, including Perl. This is simply a statement of
    fact. (b) Do you not recognize sarcasm? At least Tad recognized this
    as an attempt at humor.

    Part of this relates to some very recent personal experience. Since
    January 1, I have been told the following:
    (a) The place to set the budget and the schedule is in the scoping
    phase of the project. ('Scoping' is where you determine whether you
    have a problem that can be addressed by technology.)
    (b) You don't involve technical people in the analysis and design
    phases of a project because they will get you bogged down with
    discussions involving technical solutions, and analysis and design
    does not consider technologies.
    (c) You set the requirements, design the project, implement the code,
    and deliver it. If you have to backtrack, i.e., iterate, it means you
    failed to successfully complete a prior stage.
    (d) You debug and correct an application just before delivery. That
    way you can catch all the errors at one time and you don't need to
    waste any time in previous stages testing for and correcting errors.

    Yeah, I know. But you really can't call people four or five levels
    above you, and who control the finances and can kill your project,
    idiots. Even if they have idiotic ideas. As far as I can ten, our
    schools are churning out MBAs with their heads filled with nonsense
    like the above. And to be totally candid, it appears that some portion
    of their (bad) attitude toward technology is earned, at least to the
    extent that engineers and developers ignore the business side.
    Like ... how do we turn this into money?

    This has gotten way off thread. I won't be replying. You can have the
    last word on this topic.

    ccc31807, Feb 21, 2008
    1. Advertisements

  3. [Solution: Use \L]
    Maybe not, but \L works in perl also (reading this thread (yes, I'm a
    bit behind ...) I was astounded that nobody came up with this).

    Peter J. Holzer, Feb 29, 2008
  4. That's because you don't need to use a regex if you're going to use \L.
    In fact \L isn't valid in a regex (only in the replacement string of a
    regex replace operator) so the "regex" would be

    $var =~ s/.*/\L$1/g;

    while you could more easily use $var = "\L$var" or even better: $var =
    Joost Diepenmaat, Mar 1, 2008
  5. I meant:

    $var =~ s/(.*)/\L$1/g;

    Which is even more ugly.
    Joost Diepenmaat, Mar 1, 2008
  6. While technically true, \L is not a valid regular expression escape
    sequence, it is valid in that the m// and s/// operators which use
    regular expressions are evaluated as double quoted strings so \L is
    valid in that context.
    $ perl -le'print $& if " q " =~ /\LQ/'
    $ perl -le'print $& if " Q " =~ /\Uq/'

    $ perl -le'my $x = "Q"; print $& if " q " =~ /\L$x/'
    $ perl -le'my $x = "q"; print $& if " Q " =~ /\U$x/'

    John W. Krahn, Mar 1, 2008
  7. More importantly, the OP only asked about a "Regular Expression" because
    he didn't understand the concept. A regular expression can never replace
    anything, it can only match something. What he wanted was a
    substitution. So




    fit the question (that misconception is frequent enough that I think
    everybody in this newsgroup is familiar with it). The OP also wrote that
    he wasn't actually using perl but some software which uses PCRE. Of
    course he might have said that only after most of the answers and even
    if he had said it in his very first posting, by asking in a perl group
    he must be prepared to get perl answers, not PCRE answers.

    Peter J. Holzer, Mar 2, 2008
  8. penny

    David Combs Guest

    Yep, those are good'uns. You say you have more?

    Maybe post them here for us all to see?


    David Combs, Mar 10, 2008
  9. DC> Maybe post them here for us all to see?

    Anecdotes don't get you anywhere; the people who are capable of
    learning from them don't generally need them, and they're inadequate
    to convince people who want glossy magazines and highly-funded case

    Charlton Wilbur, Mar 10, 2008
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.