Stop saying "It didn't work", without supporting documentation of the failure. You did it here, and here, and here; three times out of nine posts. "It didn't work" is absolutely useless information, and gets you no closer to a solution. Here's how that sort of post should look:
I tried to incorporate your suggestion into my code, but it didn't work as I intended. Here's my code:
# 5 to 20 lines of code that can compile, and
# that shows the failure.
Here is the sample input:
# A few lines of characteristic input.
And here is the output I'm getting:
# A few lines of output that the code you posted produces with the inp
+ut you posted.
And here is what I would like it to produce:
# A few lines of output that the posted input should result in if the
+code were working ok.
With that sort of thorough problem description, you will get more useful answers, more quickly.
| [reply] [d/l] [select] |
Stop saying "It didn't work", without supporting documentation of the failure.
Yes, I can only fully and wholeheartedly agree with you. Thank you, David, for that. I really found the OP's answer to my suggested solution on one of the other posts you mention to be very frustrating, because I knew my solution worked (or at least did precisely what I wanted it to do). It turned out that it was not exactly what the OP was looking for, but a message like:
Thank you..it didn't work
really does not help us helping the person asking for assistance.
| [reply] |
Show what you've tried. It may also help to mention the OS where the text was created, since you may need to s/\r\n/ /g.
| [reply] [d/l] |
That's only answering half of what kenosis asked. What have you tried?
It seems like such a simple problem that if your solution didn't work, we need to see it so that we can understand what you're doing wrong. Until then, s/\n/ / is a perfectly reasonable answer. If that answer doesn't suit you, we need to know why. "It didn't work." isn't a good enough reason. We need to know how it was incorporated into your solution, and how failure manifested itself.
| [reply] [d/l] |