81–90 of 236 posts
I thought integrals / triangles was much more interesting, despite the shorter length. None of the other long pairs have any meaningful relationship, except for maybe excitation / intoxicate
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You don't _need_ to hash anything. The simplest way to do it, is to convert all the words to (normal_form, orig_word) pairs, write the list to a file, then sort it. It will be trivial to find the words with common normal form after the sort. (Of course, you wouldn't catch me trying to implement that with C if perl is an option...)
But the normal form as defined by the article is an hash, even if you then use sorting instead of bucketing
Don't forget the utterly classic anagrams we made out of "Information Superhighway" when that term was first introduced to a skeptical public. https://ad1c.us/infobahn.htm
My favorite has always been: A man a plan a canal Panama
That's a palindrome, not an anagram. If you'd like to see the director's cut of that palindrome, it's available here: http://www.fun-with-words.com/palin_panama.html I've always been partial to pangrams: sentences that use every letter in the alphabet at least once, typically shooting for a short sentence. My favorite is "Pack my box with five dozen liquor jugs". Not minimal, but delightful and uses only words that m…
Yes, this Guy Steele: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guy_L._Steele_Jr.
That was pretty good for a one-word anagram. Back in the 1990s I wrote a program that generated anagrams for longer phrases and I was surprised to find these prescient ones: Saddam Hussein = He damns Saudis Charles Manson = Slasher con man David Letterman = Dead mitral vent Mary Jo Kopechne = My joke chaperon * Benito Mussolini = So, I bout Leninism Lee Harvey Oswald = Oe, why ever Dallas? * * "Chaperon" is a valid a…
In terms of this ‘chunk scoring’ method this scores very high (15 I think?), which definitely confirms its value as a way of rating anagram quality.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ummm, the author used awk for the first version in the 1990s. > This was easy to do, even at the time, when the word list itself, at 2.5 megabytes, was a file of significant size. Perl and its cousins were not yet common; in those days I used Awk. But the task is not very different in any reasonable language:
I know. I’m talking about Perl. Try to keep up.
You wrote "Prior to Perl doing this was painful.".
I highlighted how you contradicted the author's claim that it was easy to do using awk. Awk existed long before Perl.
While I personally agree with the end result - cinematographer megachiropteran possibly being the best anagram, its worth exploring other scoring mechanisms I suppose - some kind of alliteration / cadence score to quantify how the words roll in succession. Maybe throw in semantic distance as well using clip embeddings probably to quantify the surprise element (or closeness for that matter). Gonna play around with thi…
> I wouldn't have mentioned this, but someone on StackExchange actually asked this question. I wonder if the author realizes how condescending this is.
I'm listening. Please explain.
This is the TXR Lisp interactive listener of TXR 285. Quit with :quit or Ctrl-D on an empty line. Ctrl-X ? for cheatsheet. TXR's sound system features 120 dB separation between quarreling audiophiles. 1> (flow "/usr/share/dict/words" file-get-lines (group-by sort) hash-values (keep-if cdr) (sort @1 : [chain car len])) (("ho" "oh") ("am" "ma") ("em" "me") ("no" "on") ("ah" "ha") ("it" "ti") ("mu" "um") ("eh" "he") ("a…