Re: Split confusion

If you're processing a list of upper-cased names and want to turn them into "properly" cased names, why not just do that?

c:\@Work\Perl\monks>perl -wMstrict -le
"my @names = (
   'JAMES SMITH-JONES',
   'BOB SMITH-SMYTHE-SMITH',
   'J. JONAH JAMESON',
   'BILLY BOB THORNTON',
   );
 ;;
 for my $name (@names) {
   printf qq{'$name' -> };
   $name =~ s{ \b ([[:upper:]]+) \b }{\u\L$1}xmsg;
   print qq{'$name'};
   }
"
'JAMES SMITH-JONES' -> 'James Smith-Jones'
'BOB SMITH-SMYTHE-SMITH' -> 'Bob Smith-Smythe-Smith'
'J. JONAH JAMESON' -> 'J. Jonah Jameson'
'BILLY BOB THORNTON' -> 'Billy Bob Thornton'
[download]

Update: See also Falsehoods Programmers Believe About Names.

Give a man a fish: <%-{-{-{-<

Comment on Re: Split confusion Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Split confusion by afoken (Chancellor) on Jun 03, 2020 at 19:35 UTC
If you're processing a list of upper-cased names and want to turn them into "properly" cased names, why not just do that? See also Falsehoods Programmers Believe About Names. It simply does not work correctly: #30 There exists an algorithm which transforms names and can be reversed losslessly. X:\>perl oops.pl 'JAMES SMITH-JONES' -> 'James Smith-Jones''BOB SMITH-SMYTHE-SMITH' -> +'Bob Smith -Smythe-Smith''J. JONAH JAMESON' -> 'J. Jonah Jameson''BILLY BOB THORN +TON' -> 'B illy Bob Thornton''LUDWIG VAN BEETHOVEN' -> 'Ludwig Van Beethoven' X:\>type oops.pl my @names = ( 'JAMES SMITH-JONES', 'BOB SMITH-SMYTHE-SMITH', 'J. JONAH JAMESON', 'BILLY BOB THORNTON', 'LUDWIG VAN BEETHOVEN', ); ;; for my $name (@names) { printf qq{'$name' -> }; $name =~ s{ \b ([[:upper:]]+) \b }{\u\L$1}xmsg; print qq{'$name'}; } X:\> [download] Ol' Ludwig needs a lower case 'v' in his name. Quoting Wikipedia: The prefix van to the surname "Beethoven" reflects the Flemish origins of the family; the surname suggests that "at some stage they lived at or near a beet-farm". Alexander -- Today I will gladly share my knowledge and experience, for there are no sweeter words than "I told you so". ;-)	[reply] [d/l]
Re^3: Split confusion by AnomalousMonk (Archbishop) on Jun 03, 2020 at 22:33 UTC
... "properly" ... Nobody ever mentioned lossless reversal. :) Give a man a fish: `<%-{-{-{-<`	[reply] [d/l]
Re^2: Split confusion by swampyankee (Parson) on Jun 03, 2020 at 18:37 UTC
Thank you. I was considering using a regex, but those seem to be the first clues I've lost While I'm processing names in a formulaic manner, I actually know how they write them at least when using some extended version of the Roman alphabet (some of my students have names that are transliterated from Arabic, Serbian, and Macedonian). The names were upcased by the software from the system producing the reports. Information about American English usage here and here. Floating point issues? Please read this before posting. — emc	[reply]
Re^2: Split confusion by soonix (Chancellor) on Jun 03, 2020 at 19:23 UTC
31. I can safely assume that this dictionary of bad words contains no people’s names in it. My theorem is this: For any name of any person, there is a language in which it is a swearword.	[reply]
Re^3: Split confusion by bliako (Abbot) on Jun 03, 2020 at 20:49 UTC
I have the same theory about car models	[reply]
Re^2: Split confusion by Fletch (Bishop) on Jun 03, 2020 at 18:06 UTC
Heh, #28 . . . Qapla' The cake is a lie. The cake is a lie. The cake is a lie.	[reply]