Dan Nigrin

I am trying to extract the filename and path separately from the 

output of a savedialog object. Since savedialog outputs the full 

path+filename, I know I can use strippath to get just the filename, 

I'm presuming that since I can get just the filename, and I have the 

path+filename, that I could use regexp to substract the filename from 

the path+filename, but since I suck at regular expressions, I need 

202 Hack / PC-1600 User / VSTi Host / OMS Convert / Jack OS X / Major 

I am trying to extract the filename and path separately from the 
output of a savedialog object.  Since savedialog outputs the full 
path+filename, I know I can use strippath to get just the filename, 
but how to get just the path?

I'm presuming that since I can get just the filename, and I have the 
path+filename, that I could use regexp to substract the filename from 
the path+filename, but since I suck at regular expressions, I need 
help... or perhaps some other way??

Thanks in advance,
Dan
-- 
Dan Nigrin
Defective Records
202 Hack / PC-1600 User / VSTi Host / OMS Convert / Jack OS X / Major 
Malfunction
http://www.defectiverecords.com
http://www.jackosx.com


extracting-path-only-from-savedialog

To Cycling 74: this would be a nice feature for the native [strippath].

I had my head completely in regexp, I forgot completely about 

In fact, your solution prompted me to come up with an even more 

I had my head completely in regexp, I forgot completely about 
converting to int's with atoi, etc...

In fact, your solution prompted me to come up with an even more 
stripped down one,  see below:

-- 
Dan Nigrin
Defective Records
202 Hack / PC-1600 User / VSTi Host / OMS Convert / Jack OS X / Major 
Malfunction
http://www.defectiverecords.com
http://www.jackosx.com


Quote: Dan Nigrin wrote on Wed, 06 June 2007 16:50

----------------------------------------------------

> I had my head completely in regexp, I forgot completely about 

> In fact, your solution prompted me to come up with an even more 

> #P newex 56 204 63 196617 print Folder;

> 202 Hack / PC-1600 User / VSTi Host / OMS Convert / Jack OS X / Major 

Quote: Dan Nigrin wrote on Wed, 06 June 2007 16:50
----------------------------------------------------
> Thanks Mattijs!
>
> I had my head completely in regexp, I forgot completely about 
> converting to int's with atoi, etc...
>
> In fact, your solution prompted me to come up with an even more 
> stripped down one,  see below:
>
> Thanks again,
> Dan
>
> #P window setfont "Sans Serif" 9.;
> #P window linecount 1;
> #P newex 56 182 40 196617 itoa;
> #P newex 56 161 51 196617 zl ecils 1;
> #P newex 97 139 34 196617 zl len;
> #P newex 51 117 40 196617 atoi;
> #P newex 97 117 40 196617 atoi;
> #P newex 97 92 51 196617 strippath;
> #P button 73 47 15 0;
> #P newex 73 67 56 196617 opendialog;
> #P newex 141 116 51 196617 print File;
> #P newex 56 204 63 196617 print Folder;
> #P connect 2 0 6 0;
> #P connect 6 0 8 0;
> #P connect 8 0 9 0;
> #P connect 9 0 0 0;
> #P connect 3 0 2 0;
> #P connect 2 0 4 0;
> #P connect 4 0 5 0;
> #P connect 5 0 7 0;
> #P connect 7 0 8 1;
> #P connect 4 0 1 0;
> #P window clipboard copycount 10;
>
> -- 
> Dan Nigrin
> Defective Records
> 202 Hack / PC-1600 User / VSTi Host / OMS Convert / Jack OS X / Major 
> Malfunction
> http://www.defectiverecords.com
> http://www.jackosx.com
>
>
----------------------------------------------------


Am 06.06.2007 um 16:21 schrieb Mattijs Kneppers:

> To Cycling 74: this would be a nice feature for the native 

>
> Is this what you need?
>
> To Cycling 74: this would be a nice feature for the native  
> [strippath].
>
> Mattijs
>
> #P button 35 43 15 0;
> #P newex 35 60 56 196617 opendialog;
> #P newex 35 117 51 196617 print File;
> #P newex 35 98 63 196617 print Folder;
> #N vpatcher 367 521 575 873;
> #P window setfont "Sans Serif" 9.;
> #P newex 70 269 36 196617 zl reg;
> #P newex 96 250 40 196617 itoa;
> #N comlet File Name;
> #P outlet 70 289 15 0;
> #P newex 103 175 27 196617 + 1;
> #P newex 29 57 27 196617 t b l;
> #P newex 55 231 51 196617 zl slice 1;
> #P newex 29 269 36 196617 zl reg;
> #P newex 55 98 27 196617 t l l;
> #P newex 55 136 37 196617 zl rev;
> #P newex 55 250 40 196617 itoa;
> #P newex 55 212 36 196617 zl reg;
> #P newex 55 193 32 196617 sel 1;
> #P newex 55 155 58 196617 unpack 0 0;
> #P newex 55 174 37 196617 == 47;
> #P newex 55 117 52 196617 listfunnel;
> #P newex 55 79 40 196617 atoi;
> #N comlet Absolute Path;
> #P inlet 29 39 15 0;
> #N comlet Folder;
> #P outlet 29 289 15 0;
> #P connect 1 0 13 0;
> #P connect 13 0 11 0;
> #P connect 11 0 0 0;
> #P connect 13 1 2 0;
> #P connect 2 0 10 0;
> #P connect 10 0 3 0;
> #P connect 3 0 9 0;
> #P connect 9 0 5 0;
> #P connect 5 0 4 0;
> #P connect 4 0 6 0;
> #P connect 6 0 7 0;
> #P connect 7 0 12 0;
> #P connect 12 0 8 0;
> #P connect 8 0 11 1;
> #P connect 13 0 17 0;
> #P connect 17 0 15 0;
> #P connect 10 1 7 1;
> #P connect 14 0 12 1;
> #P connect 12 1 16 0;
> #P connect 16 0 17 1;
> #P connect 5 1 14 0;
> #P pop;
> #P newobj 35 79 59 196617 p strippath;
> #P connect 0 1 2 0;
> #P connect 0 0 1 0;
> #P connect 4 0 3 0;
> #P connect 3 0 0 0;
>
>
> --
> SmadSteck - http://www.smadsteck.nl
> Hard- and software for interactive audiovisual sampling


Nice nice nice :) I never ventured into regexp either. Quite a shame since it can be such a powerful tool.

Nonetheless I think incorporating this in strippath would be a good idea, if it was only for the sake of completeness.

Quote: Jeremy Bernstein wrote on Wed, 06 June 2007 17:12

> #P newex 246 169 98 196617 regexp (.*)/(.*?)$;

> #P newex 213 255 63 196617 print Folder;

Nice nice nice :) I never ventured into regexp either. Quite a shame since it can be such a powerful tool. 

Quote: Jeremy Bernstein wrote on Wed, 06 June 2007 17:12
----------------------------------------------------
> And here's the simple version ;)
>
> #P window setfont "Sans Serif" 9.;
> #P window linecount 1;
> #P newex 268 201 56 196617 unpack s s;
> #P newex 246 169 98 196617 regexp (.*)/(.*?)$;
> #P button 95 103 15 0;
> #P newex 95 120 56 196617 opendialog;
> #P newex 317 259 51 196617 print File;
> #P newex 213 255 63 196617 print Folder;
> #P connect 5 1 1 0;
> #P connect 5 0 0 0;
> #P connect 4 1 5 0;
> #P connect 2 0 4 0;
> #P connect 3 0 2 0;
> #P window clipboard copycount 6;
>
> jb


On 6 juin 07, at 16:50, Dan Nigrin wrote:

So here's one with a regular expression. It search for anything (.) 

which appears at least once (+) followed by a slash /, memorize that 

as the first backreference (that's why .+/ is surrounded by 

parenthesis), and this must be followed by something else (up to the 

next slash excluded) which will be rememeber as the second 

backreference. I'm not sur the last sentence does mean anything 

> I had my head completely in regexp, I forgot completely about  
> converting to int's with atoi, etc...

So here's one with a regular expression. It search for anything (.)  
which appears at least once (+) followed by a slash /, memorize that  
as the first backreference (that's why .+/ is surrounded by  
parenthesis), and this must be followed by something else (up to the  
next slash excluded) which will be rememeber as the second  
backreference. I'm not sur the last sentence does mean anything  
though...

Damn, even fewer objects than mine! I knew that regexp would make it easy....

(.*)/ = as many characters as I like to the left of the rightmost '/'

(.*?) = as many characters as I like to the right of the 

rightmost '/' But what does the '?' mean?

Damn, even fewer objects than mine!  I knew that regexp would make it easy....

$               = right anchor
(.*)/         = as many characters as I like to the left of the rightmost '/'
(.*?)         = as many characters as I like to the right of the 
rightmost '/'     But what does the '?' mean?

Quote: Dan Nigrin wrote on Wed, 06 June 2007 17:24

let me guess.. that there must be at least one character to the right of /

Quote: Dan Nigrin wrote on Wed, 06 June 2007 17:24
----------------------------------------------------
> But what does the '?' mean?

>So here's one with a regular expression. It search for anything (.) 

>which appears at least once (+) followed by a slash /, memorize that 

>as the first backreference (that's why .+/ is surrounded by 

>parenthesis), and this must be followed by something else (up to the 

>next slash excluded) which will be rememeber as the second 

>backreference. I'm not sur the last sentence does mean anything 

Ugh... so now I've got Emmanuel's vs. Jeremy's:

>So here's one with a regular expression. It search for anything (.) 
>which appears at least once (+) followed by a slash /, memorize that 
>as the first backreference (that's why .+/ is surrounded by 
>parenthesis), and this must be followed by something else (up to the 
>next slash excluded) which will be rememeber as the second 
>backreference. I'm not sur the last sentence does mean anything 
>though...

Ugh... so now I've got Emmanuel's  vs.  Jeremy's:

Dan
-- 
Dan Nigrin
Defective Records
202 Hack / PC-1600 User / VSTi Host / OMS Convert / Jack OS X / Major 
Malfunction
http://www.defectiverecords.com
http://www.jackosx.com


Quote: Emmanuel Jourdan wrote on Wed, 06 June 2007 17:21

> On 6 juin 07, at 16:50, Dan Nigrin wrote:

> > I had my head completely in regexp, I forgot completely about 

> > converting to int's with atoi, etc...

> So here's one with a regular expression. It search for anything (.) 

> which appears at least once (+) followed by a slash /, memorize that 

> as the first backreference (that's why .+/ is surrounded by 

> parenthesis), and this must be followed by something else (up to the 

> next slash excluded) which will be rememeber as the second 

> backreference. I'm not sur the last sentence does mean anything 

> #P newex 148 37 76 196617 opendialog fold;

> #P hidden newex 16 141 68 196617 loadmess set;

> #P newex 179 131 62 196617 prepend set;

> #P newex 103 131 62 196617 prepend set;

> #P newex 81 63 99 196617 regexp (.+/)([^/]+);

Quote: Emmanuel Jourdan wrote on Wed, 06 June 2007 17:21
----------------------------------------------------
> On 6 juin 07, at 16:50, Dan Nigrin wrote:
>
> > I had my head completely in regexp, I forgot completely about  
> > converting to int's with atoi, etc...
>
> So here's one with a regular expression. It search for anything (.)  
> which appears at least once (+) followed by a slash /, memorize that  
> as the first backreference (that's why .+/ is surrounded by  
> parenthesis), and this must be followed by something else (up to the  
> next slash excluded) which will be rememeber as the second  
> backreference. I'm not sur the last sentence does mean anything  
> though...
>
> ej
>
> #P button 148 17 15 0;
> #P window setfont "Sans Serif" 9.;
> #P window linecount 1;
> #P newex 148 37 76 196617 opendialog fold;
> #P hidden newex 16 141 68 196617 loadmess set;
> #B color 4;
> #P window linecount 0;
> #P message 179 165 50 196617;
> #P window linecount 1;
> #P newex 179 131 62 196617 prepend set;
> #P window linecount 0;
> #P message 103 165 50 196617;
> #P window linecount 1;
> #P newex 103 131 62 196617 prepend set;
> #P newex 103 102 86 196617 zl slice 1;
> #P newex 81 63 99 196617 regexp (.+/)([^/]+);
> #P button 81 17 15 0;
> #P newex 81 37 56 196617 opendialog;
> #P hidden connect 8 0 5 0;
> #P hidden connect 8 0 7 0;
> #P connect 2 1 3 0;
> #P connect 0 0 2 0;
> #P connect 9 0 2 0;
> #P connect 10 0 9 0;
> #P connect 1 0 0 0;
> #P connect 3 0 4 0;
> #P connect 4 0 5 0;
> #P connect 6 0 7 0;
> #P connect 3 1 6 0;
> #P window clipboard copycount 11;
>
>
>
----------------------------------------------------


On 6 juin 07, at 17:29, Mattijs Kneppers wrote:

> let me guess.. that there must be at least one character to the 

It's the lazy quantifier. It shouldn't be necessary because the first 

one (.*) consumes "the more that it can". My regexp suggestion deals 

also with folders :) but as usual with regexp, you'll have to adapt 

it depending on the input you might have.

> let me guess.. that there must be at least one character to the  
> right of /

It's the lazy quantifier. It shouldn't be necessary because the first  
one (.*) consumes "the more that it can". My regexp suggestion deals  
also with folders :) but as usual with regexp, you'll have to adapt  
it depending on the input you might have.

The ? is the non-greedy qualifier in this case and forces the 2nd () 

section to only capture a single name (without any '/'s). The lack of 

a ? in the first capture allows it to be arbitrarily long (it's greedy).

Am 06.06.2007 um 17:24 schrieb Dan Nigrin:

> Damn, even fewer objects than mine! I knew that regexp would make 

> (.*)/ = as many characters as I like to the left of the 

> (.*?) = as many characters as I like to the right of the 

> rightmost '/' But what does the '?' mean?

> 202 Hack / PC-1600 User / VSTi Host / OMS Convert / Jack OS X / 

The ? is the non-greedy qualifier in this case and forces the 2nd ()  
section to only capture a single name (without any '/'s). The lack of  
a ? in the first capture allows it to be arbitrarily long (it's greedy).

> Damn, even fewer objects than mine!  I knew that regexp would make  
> it easy....
>
> So let's see if I'm slowly learning:
>
> (.*)/(.*?)$
>
> $               = right anchor
> (.*)/         = as many characters as I like to the left of the  
> rightmost '/'
> (.*?)         = as many characters as I like to the right of the  
> rightmost '/'     But what does the '?' mean?
>
> -- 
> Dan Nigrin
> Defective Records
> 202 Hack / PC-1600 User / VSTi Host / OMS Convert / Jack OS X /  
> Major Malfunction
> http://www.defectiverecords.com
> http://www.jackosx.com
>


On 6 juin 07, at 17:32, Dan Nigrin wrote:

> Ugh... so now I've got Emmanuel's vs. Jeremy's:

(.*)/ : search for any characters followed by a slash. there's 2 

important things about the * quantifier (it defines how many times 

the character/class of character before appears): it can appear from 

0 to many many times (which is a lot), and it's always successful 

(.*?)$: means the smallest number of characters at the end of the string

(.+/): search for at least one (that's the + quantifier) character 

([^/]+): from 1 to many characters which are not slash.

On 6 juin 07, at 17:35, Mattijs Kneppers wrote:

> Ugh... so now I've got Emmanuel's  vs.  Jeremy's:
>
> (.+/)([^/]+    vs.    (.*)/(.*?)$

(.*)/ : search for any characters followed by a slash. there's 2  
important things about the * quantifier (it defines how many times  
the character/class of character before appears): it can appear from  
0 to many many times (which is a lot), and it's always successful  
(that's why I didn't used it).
(.*?)$: means the smallest number of characters at the end of the string

Mine: (.+/)([^/]+)
(.+/): search for at least one (that's the + quantifier) character  
followed by a slash
([^/]+): from 1 to many characters which are not slash.

Thanks Jeremy and Emmanuel for the lessons!

At 5:56 PM +0200 6/6/07, Jeremy Bernstein wrote:

>The ? is the non-greedy qualifier in this case and forces the 2nd () 

>section to only capture a single name (without any '/'s). The lack 

>of a ? in the first capture allows it to be arbitrarily long (it's 

At 5:56 PM +0200 6/6/07, Jeremy Bernstein wrote:
>The ? is the non-greedy qualifier in this case and forces the 2nd () 
>section to only capture a single name (without any '/'s). The lack 
>of a ? in the first capture allows it to be arbitrarily long (it's 
>greedy).
>
>jb

Guess I'll have to postpone regexp for another few months ;)

Quote: Jeremy Bernstein wrote on Wed, 06 June 2007 17:56

> The ? is the non-greedy qualifier in this case and forces the 2nd () 

> section to only capture a single name (without any '/'s). The lack of 

> a ? in the first capture allows it to be arbitrarily long (it's greedy).

> Am 06.06.2007 um 17:24 schrieb Dan Nigrin:

> > Damn, even fewer objects than mine! I knew that regexp would make 

> > (.*)/ = as many characters as I like to the left of the 

> > (.*?) = as many characters as I like to the right of the 

> > rightmost '/' But what does the '?' mean?

> > 202 Hack / PC-1600 User / VSTi Host / OMS Convert / Jack OS X / 

Quote: Jeremy Bernstein wrote on Wed, 06 June 2007 17:56
----------------------------------------------------
> The ? is the non-greedy qualifier in this case and forces the 2nd ()  
> section to only capture a single name (without any '/'s). The lack of  
> a ? in the first capture allows it to be arbitrarily long (it's greedy).
>
> jb
>
> Am 06.06.2007 um 17:24 schrieb Dan Nigrin:
>
> > Damn, even fewer objects than mine!  I knew that regexp would make  
> > it easy....
> >
> > So let's see if I'm slowly learning:
> >
> > (.*)/(.*?)$
> >
> > $               = right anchor
> > (.*)/         = as many characters as I like to the left of the  
> > rightmost '/'
> > (.*?)         = as many characters as I like to the right of the  
> > rightmost '/'     But what does the '?' mean?
> >
> > -- 
> > Dan Nigrin
> > Defective Records
> > 202 Hack / PC-1600 User / VSTi Host / OMS Convert / Jack OS X /  
> > Major Malfunction
> > http://www.defectiverecords.com
> > http://www.jackosx.com
> >
>
>
----------------------------------------------------


> Lovely & instructive, guys. I still find the whole regexp thing an 

> example of how not to use programming languages/solve problems.

I completely agree, if you don't do it regularly, there is no chance to 

keep the regexpr way of thinking in the brain. Forth was a bit like 

that, though if you do it day by day its very effective...

I can easily understand my atoi patches, but whenever I see a regexpr, I 

can only accept its doing what its supposed to do, and if not, there is 

no chance to debug it other than trial and error. Trying to follow the 

rules turn my brain into a Brei (german for porridge). To hook up an 

atoi based letter mangling is much faster and my brain is still working 

> The atoi solution is not exactly intuitive either, btw.

Its just looking at single characters of a string...

Zip Boterbloem schrieb:
> Lovely & instructive, guys. I still find the whole regexp thing an 
> example of how not to use programming languages/solve problems.

I completely agree, if you don't do it regularly, there is no chance to 
keep the regexpr way of thinking in the brain. Forth was a bit like 
that, though if you do it day by day its very effective...

I can easily understand my atoi patches, but whenever I see a regexpr, I 
can only accept its doing what its supposed to do, and if not, there is 
no chance to debug it other than trial and error. Trying to follow the 
rules turn my brain into a Brei (german for porridge). To hook up an 
atoi based letter mangling is much faster and my brain is still working 
afterwards....

-- 
Stefan Tiedje------------x-------
--_____-----------|--------------
--(_|_ ----|-----|-----()-------
-- _|_)----|-----()--------------
----------()--------www.ccmix.com


Op 7-jun-2007, om 10:26 heeft Stefan Tiedje het volgende geschreven:

>> Lovely & instructive, guys. I still find the whole regexp thing an 

>> example of how not to use programming languages/solve problems.

> I completely agree, if you don't do it regularly, there is no 

> chance to keep the regexpr way of thinking in the brain. Forth was 

> a bit like that, though if you do it day by day its very effective...

Yeah! Forth. Used that as my main programming language for years. 

Anyone remember Formula? Forth for music on the Atari? Fast. Small. 

Ugly. No compile/link but near realtime tweaking. Boy. Those were the 

days. I even implemented an OOP model in it. Didn't work very well, 

Zip Boterbloem
Media Mechanics
Zwaluwstraat 54
2025 VR  Haarlem
The Netherlands
+31627014758
zip@knoware.nl

> Zip Boterbloem schrieb:
>> Lovely & instructive, guys. I still find the whole regexp thing an  
>> example of how not to use programming languages/solve problems.
>
> I completely agree, if you don't do it regularly, there is no  
> chance to keep the regexpr way of thinking in the brain. Forth was  
> a bit like that, though if you do it day by day its very effective...

Yeah! Forth. Used that as my main programming language for years.  
Anyone remember Formula? Forth for music on the Atari? Fast. Small.  
Ugly. No compile/link but near realtime tweaking. Boy. Those were the  
days. I even implemented an OOP model in it. Didn't work very well,  
though.

Quote: Stefan Tiedje wrote on Thu, 07 June 2007 10:26

> > Lovely & instructive, guys. I still find the whole regexp thing an 

> > example of how not to use programming languages/solve problems.

> I completely agree, if you don't do it regularly, there is no chance to 

> keep the regexpr way of thinking in the brain. Forth was a bit like 

> that, though if you do it day by day its very effective...

Quote: Stefan Tiedje wrote on Thu, 07 June 2007 10:26
----------------------------------------------------
> Zip Boterbloem schrieb:
> > Lovely & instructive, guys. I still find the whole regexp thing an 
> > example of how not to use programming languages/solve problems.
>
> I completely agree, if you don't do it regularly, there is no chance to 
> keep the regexpr way of thinking in the brain. Forth was a bit like 
> that, though if you do it day by day its very effective...
>
>

For the record: http://www.xkcd.com/c208.html


My answer to this is in the patch below... ;-)

Mattijs Kneppers schrieb:
> For the record: http://www.xkcd.com/c208.html

I wanted them to start talking when I clicked the messages... ;-)

At 1:16 PM +0200 6/10/07, Stefan Tiedje wrote:

>My answer to this is in the patch below... ;-)

At 1:16 PM +0200 6/10/07, Stefan Tiedje wrote:
>Mattijs Kneppers schrieb:
>>For the record: http://www.xkcd.com/c208.html
>
>My answer to this is in the patch below... ;-)

Quote: Stefan Tiedje wrote on Sun, 10 June 2007 13:16

> My answer to this is in the patch below... ;-)

Now for the 3D engine with patch cords.. ;)

Quote: Stefan Tiedje wrote on Sun, 10 June 2007 13:16
----------------------------------------------------
> Mattijs Kneppers schrieb:
> > For the record: http://www.xkcd.com/c208.html
>
> My answer to this is in the patch below... ;-)
>

> Now for the 3D engine with patch cords.. ;)

Mattijs Kneppers schrieb:
> Now for the 3D engine with patch cords.. ;)

extracting path only from savedialog