I am working on a latex file from which I need to pick out the references marked by \citep{}. This is what I am doing using sed.
cat file.tex | grep citep | sed 's/.*citep{\(.*\)}.*/\1/g'
Now this one works if there is only one pattern in a line. If there are more than one patterns i.e. \citep in a line, it fails. It fails even when there is only one pattern but more than one closing bracket }. What should I do, so that it works for all the patterns in a line and also for the exclusive bracket I am looking for?
I am working on bash. And a part of the file looks like this:
of the Asian crust further north \citep{TapponnierM76, WangLiu2009}. This has led to widespread deformation both within and
\citep{BilhamE01, Mitraetal2005} and by distributed seismicity across the region (Fig. \ref{fig1_2}). Recent GPS Geodetic
across the Dawki fault and Naga Hills, increasing eastwards from $\sim$3~mm/yr to $\sim$13~mm/yr \citep{Vernantetal2014}.
GPS velocity vectors \citep{TapponnierM76, WangLiu2009}. Sikkim Himalaya lies at the transition between this relatively simple
this transition includes deviation of the Himalaya from a perfect arc beyond 89\deg\ longitude \citep{BendickB2001}, reduction
\citep{BhattacharyaM2009, Mitraetal2010}. Rivers Tista, Rangit and Rangli run through Sikkim eroding the MCT and Ramgarh
thrust to form a mushroom-shaped physiography \citep{Mukuletal2009,Mitraetal2010}. Within this sinuous physiography,
\citep{Pauletal2015} and also in accordance with the findings of \citet{Mitraetal2005} for northeast India. In another study
field results corroborate well with seismic studies in this region \citep{Actonetal2011, Arunetal2010}. From studies of
On one line, I get answer like this
BilhamE01, TapponnierM76} and by distributed seismicity across the region (Fig. \ref{fig1_2
whereas I am looking for
BilhamE01, TapponnierM76
Another example with more than one /citep patterns gives output like this
Pauletal2015} and also in accordance with the findings of \citet{Mitraetal2005} for northeast India. In another study
whereas I am looking for
Pauletal2015 Mitraetal2005
Can anyone please help?
it's a greedy match change the regex match the first closing brace
.*citep{\([^}]*\)}
test
$ echo "\citep{string} xyz {abc}" | sed 's/.*citep{\([^}]*\)}.*/\1/'
string
note that it will only match one instance per line.
If you are using grep anyway, you can as well stick with it (assuming GNU grep):
$ echo $str | grep -oP '(?<=\\citep{)[^}]+(?=})'
BilhamE01, TapponierM76
For what it's worth, this can be done with sed:
echo "\citep{string} xyz {abc} \citep{string2},foo" | \
sed 's/\\citep{\([^}]*\)}/\n\1\n\n/g; s/^[^\n]*\n//; s/\n\n[^\n]*\n/, /g; s/\n.*//g'
output:
string, string2
But wow, is that ugly. The sed script is more easily understood in this form, which happens to be suitable to be fed to sed via a -f argument:
# change every \citep{string} to <newline>string<newline><newline>
s/\\citep{\([^}]*\)}/\n\1\n\n/g
# remove any leading text before the first wanted string
s/^[^\n]*\n//
# replace text between wanted strings with comma + space
s/\n\n[^\n]*\n/, /g
# remove any trailing unwanted text
s/\n.*//
This makes use of the fact that sed can match and sub the newline character, even though reading a new line of input will not result in a newline initially appearing in the pattern space. The newline is the one character that we can be certain will appear in the pattern space (or in the hold space) only if sed puts it there intentionally.
The initial substitution is purely to make the problem manageable by simplifying the target delimiters. In principle, the remaining steps could be performed without that simplification, but the regular expressions involved would be horrendous.
This does assume that the string in every \citep{string} contains at least one character; if the empty string must be accommodated, too, then this approach needs a bit more refinement.
Of course, I can't imagine why anyone would prefer this to #Lev's straight grep approach, but the question does ask specifically for a sed solution.
f.awk
BEGIN {
pat = "\\citep"
latex_tok = "\\\\[A-Za-z_][A-Za-z_]*" # match \aBcD
}
{
f = f $0 # store content of input file as a sting
}
function store(args, n, k, i) { # store `keys' in `d'
gsub("[ \t]", "", args) # remove spaces
n = split(args, keys, ",")
for (i=1; i<=n; i++) {
k = keys[i]
d[k]
}
}
function ntok() { # next token
if (match(f, latex_tok)) {
tok = substr(f, RSTART ,RLENGTH)
f = substr(f, RSTART+RLENGTH-1 )
return 1
}
return 0
}
function parse( i, rc, args) {
for (;;) { # infinite loop
while ( (rc = ntok()) && tok != pat ) ;
if (!rc) return
i = index(f, "{")
if (!i) return # see `pat' but no '{'
f = substr(f, i+1)
i = index(f, "}")
if (!i) return # unmatched '}'
# extract `args' from \citep{`args'}
args = substr(f, 1, i-1)
store(args)
}
}
END {
parse()
for (k in d)
print k
}
f.example
of the Asian crust further north \citep{TapponnierM76, WangLiu2009}. This has led to widespread deformation both within and
\citep{BilhamE01, Mitraetal2005} and by distributed seismicity across the region (Fig. \ref{fig1_2}). Recent GPS Geodetic
across the Dawki fault and Naga Hills, increasing eastwards from $\sim$3~mm/yr to $\sim$13~mm/yr \citep{Vernantetal2014}.
GPS velocity vectors \citep{TapponnierM76, WangLiu2009}. Sikkim Himalaya lies at the transition between this relatively simple
this transition includes deviation of the Himalaya from a perfect arc beyond 89\deg\ longitude \citep{BendickB2001}, reduction
\citep{BhattacharyaM2009, Mitraetal2010}. Rivers Tista, Rangit and Rangli run through Sikkim eroding the MCT and Ramgarh
thrust to form a mushroom-shaped physiography \citep{Mukuletal2009,Mitraetal2010}. Within this sinuous physiography,
\citep{Pauletal2015} and also in accordance with the findings of \citet{Mitraetal2005} for northeast India. In another study
field results corroborate well with seismic studies in this region \citep{Actonetal2011, Arunetal2010}. From studies of
Usage:
awk -f f.awk f.example
Expected ouput:
BendickB2001
Arunetal2010
Pauletal2015
Mitraetal2005
BilhamE01
Mukuletal2009
TapponnierM76
WangLiu2009
BhattacharyaM2009
Mitraetal2010
Actonetal2011
Vernantetal2014
Related
Let's say I have a set of 100,000 strings, each one around 20-50 bytes on average.
Then let's say I have another set of 100,000,000 strings, each one also around 20-50 bytes on average.
I'd like to go through all 100,000,000 strings from the second set and check if any one of the strings from the first set exist in any one string from the second set.
Example: string from first set: "abc", string from second set: "123abc123" = match!
I've tried using Perl's index(), but it's not fast enough. Is there a better way to do this type of matching?
I found Algorithm::AhoCorasik::XS on CPAN, which implements the classic, very efficient multiple string search Aho-Corasick algorithm (Same one used by grep -F), and it seems to be reasonably fast (About half the speed of an equivalent grep invocation):
Example script:
#!/usr/bin/env perl
use warnings;
use strict;
use autodie;
use feature qw/say/;
use Algorithm::AhoCorasick::XS;
open my $set1, "<", "set1.txt";
my #needles = <$set1>;
chomp #needles;
my $search = Algorithm::AhoCorasick::XS->new(\#needles);
open my $set2, "<", "set2.txt";
while (<$set2>) {
chomp;
say if defined $search->first_match($_);
}
and using it (With randomly-generated test files):
$ wc -l set1.txt set2.txt
10000 set1.txt
500000 set2.txt
510000 total
$ time perl test.pl | wc -l
458414
real 0m0.403s
user 0m0.359s
sys 0m0.031s
$ time grep -Ff set1.txt set2.txt | wc -l
458414
real 0m0.199s
user 0m0.188s
sys 0m0.031s
You should use a regex alternation, like:
my #string = qw/abc def ghi/;
my $matcher = qr/#{[join '|', map quotemeta, sort #string]}/;
This should be faster than using index. But it can be made faster yet:
Up to a certain limit, depending on both the length and number of the strings, perl will build a trie for efficient matching; see e.g. https://perlmonks.org/?node_id=670558. You will want to experiment with how many strings you can include in a single regex to generate an array of regexes. Then combine those separate regexes into a single one (untested):
my #search_strings = ...;
my #matchers;
my $string_limit = 3000; # a guess on my part
my #strings = sort #search_strings;
while (my #subset = splice #strings, 0, $string_limit) {
push #matchers, qr/^.*?#{[join '|', map quotemeta, sort #subset]}/s;
}
my $matcher = '(?:' . join('|', map "(??{\$matchers[$_]})", 0..$#matchers) . ')';
$matcher = do { use re 'eval'; qr/$matcher/ };
/$matcher/ and print "line $. matched: $_" while <>;
The (??{...}) construct is needed to join the separate regexes; without it, the subregexes are all just interpolated and the joined regex compiled all together, removing the trie optimization. Each subregex starts with ^.*? so it searches the entire string; without that, the joined regex would have to invoke each subregex separately for each position in the string.
Using contrived data, I'm seeing about 3000 strings searched per second with this approach in a not very fast vm. Using the naive regex is less than 50 strings per second. Using grep, as suggested in a comment by Shawn, is faster (about 4200 strings per second for me) but gives you less control if you want to do things like identify which strings matched or at what positions.
You may want to have a look at https://github.com/leendo/hello-world .
Its parallel processing makes it really fast. Either just type in all search terms individually or as || conjunctions, or (better) adapt it to run the second set programatically in one go.
Here is an idea: you could partition the dictionary into lists of words that have the same 2 or 3 letter prefix. You would then iterate on the large set and for each position in each string, extract the prefix and try and match the strings that have this prefix.
You would use hashtable to store the lists with O(1) lookup time.
If some words in the dictionary are shorter than the prefix length, you would have to special case short words.
Making prefixes longer will make the hashtable larger but the lists shorter, improving the test time.
I have no clue if this can be implemented efficiently in Perl.
The task is quite simple and perhaps used on everyday basis around the globe.
Please see following code snippet for one of many possible implementations
use strict;
use warnings;
use feature 'say';
use Getopt::Long qw(GetOptions);
use Pod::Usage;
my %opt;
my $re;
GetOptions(
'sample|s=s' => \$opt{sample},
'debug|d' => \$opt{debug},
'help|h' => \$opt{help},
'man|m' => \$opt{man}
) or pod2usage(2);
pod2usage(1) if $opt{help};
pod2usage(-verbose => 2) if $opt{man};
pod2usage("$0: No files given.") if ((#ARGV == 0) && (-t STDIN));
$re = read_re($opt{sample});
say "DEBUG: search pattern is ($re)" if $opt{debug};
find_in_file($re);
sub find_in_file {
my $search = shift;
while( <> ) {
chomp;
next unless /$search/;
say;
}
}
sub read_re {
my $filename = shift;
open my $fh, '<', $filename
or die "Couldn't open $filename";
my #data = <$fh>;
close $fh;
chomp #data;
my $re = join('|', #data);
return $re;
}
__END__
=head1 NAME
file_in_file.pl - search strings of one file in other
=head1 SYNOPSIS
yt_video_list.pl [options] -s sample.txt dbfile.txt
Options:
-s,--sample search pattern file
-d,--debug debug flag
-h,--help brief help message
-m,--man full documentation
=head1 OPTIONS
=over 4
=item B<-s,--sample>
Search pattern file
=item B<-d,--debug>
Print debug information.
=item B<-h,--help>
Print a brief help message and exits.
=item B<-m,--man>
Prints the manual page and exits.
=back
B<This program> seaches patterns from B<sample> file in B<dbfile>
=cut
I am performing several commands (GNU sed) on a line and if certain condition is met, I want to skip rest of the commands.
Example:
I want to substitute all d with 4
If line start with A, C or E, skip the rest of the commands (another substitutions etc)
I want to use basic regular expressions only. If I could use extended regex, this would be trivial:
sed -r 's/d/4/g; /^(A|C|E)/! { s/a/1/g; s/b/2/g; s/c/3/g }' data
Now, with BRE, this will work fine but for more conditions, it will be really ugly:
sed 's/d/4/g; /^A/! { /^C/! { /^E/! { s/a/1/g; s/b/2/g; s/c/3/g } } }' data
Example input:
Aaabbccdd
Baabbccdd
Caabbccdd
Daabbccdd
Eaabbccdd
Example output:
Aaabbcc44
B11223344
Caabbcc44
D11223344
Eaabbcc44
This is just an example. I am not looking for different ways to approach the problem. I want to know some better ways to start a new cycle.
I suggest to use b:
/^\(A\|C\|E\)/b
From man sed:
b label: Branch to label; if label is omitted, branch to end of script.
I'm getting hard times understanding how to achieve what I want using awk and after searching for quite some time, I couldn't find the solution I'm looking for.
I have an input text that looks like this:
Some text (possibly containing text within parenthesis).
Some other text
Another line (with something here) with some text
(
Element 4
)
Another line
(
Element 1, span 1 to
Element 5, span 4
)
Another Line
I want to properly format the weird lines between ' (' and ')'. The expected output is as follow:
Some text (possibly containing text within parenthesis).
Some other text
Another line (with something here) with some text
(Element 4)
Another line
(Element 1, span 1 to Element 5, span 4)
Another Line
Looking up on stack overflow I found this :
How to select lines between two marker patterns which may occur multiple times with awk/sed
So what I'm using now is echo $text | awk '/ \(/{flag=1;next}/\)/{flag=0}flag'
Which almost works except it filters out the non-matching lines, here's the output produced by this very last command:
(Element 4)
(Element 1, span 1 to Element 5, span 4)
Anyone knows how-to do this? I'm open to any suggestion, including not-using awk if you know better.
Bonus point if you teach me how to remove syntaxic coloration on my question code blocks :)
Thanks a billion times
Edit: Ok, so I accepted #EdMorton's solution as he provided something using awk (well, GNU awk). However, I'm currently using #aaron's sed voodoo incantations with great success and will probably continue doing so until I hit anything new on that specific usecase.
I strongly suggest reading EdMorton's explanation, last paragraph made my day. If anyone passing by has good ressources regarding awk/sed they can share, feel free to do so in the comments.
Here's how I would do it with GNU sed :
s/^\s*(/(/;/^(/{:l N;/)/b e;b l;:e s/\n//g}
Which, for those who don't speak gibberish, means :
remove the leading spaces from lines that start with spaces and an opening bracket
test if the line now start with an opening bracket. If that's the case, do the following :
mark this spot as the label l, which denotes the start of a loop
add a line from the input to the pattern space
test if you now have a closing bracket in your pattern space
if so, jump to the label e
(if not) jump to the label l
mark this spot as the label e, which denotes the end of the code
remove the linefeeds from the pattern space
(implicitly print the pattern space, whether it has been modified or not)
This can probably be refined, but it does the trick :
$ echo """Some text (possibly containing text within parenthesis).
Some other text
Another line (with something here) with some text
(
Element 4
)
Another line
(
Element 1, span 1 to
Element 5, span 4
)
Another Line """ | sed 's/^\s*(/(/;/^(/{:l N;/)/b e;b l;:e s/\n//g}'
Some text (possibly containing text within parenthesis).
Some other text
Another line (with something here) with some text
(Element 4)
Another line
(Element 1, span 1 to Element 5, span 4)
Another Line
Edit : if you can disable history expansion (set +H), this sed command is nicer : s/^\s*(/(/;/^(/{:l N;/)/!b l;s/\n//g}
sed is for simple substitutions on individual lines, that is all. If you try to do anything else with it then you are using constructs that became obsolete in the mid-1970s when awk was invented, are almost certainly non-portable and inefficient, are always just a pile of indecipherable arcane runes, and are used today just for mental exercise.
The following uses GNU awk for multi-char RS, RT and the \s shorthand for [[:space:]] and works by simply isolating the (...) strings and then doing whatever you want with them:
$ cat tst.awk
BEGIN {
RS="[(][^)]+[)]" # a regexp for the string you want to isolate in RT
ORS="" # disable appending of newlines so we print as-is
}
{
gsub(/\n[[:blank:]]+$/,"\n") # remove any blanks before RT at the start of each line
sub(/\(\s+/,"(",RT) # remove spaces after ( in RT
sub(/\s+\)/,")",RT) # remove spaces before ) in RT
gsub(/\s+/," ",RT) # compress each chain of spaces to one blank char in RT
print $0 RT # print the result
}
$ awk -f tst.awk file
Some text (possibly containing text within parenthesis).
Some other text
Another line (with something here) with some text
(Element 4)
Another line
(Element 1, span 1 to Element 5, span 4)
Another Line
If you're considering using a sed solution for this also consider how you would enhance it if/when you have the slightest requirements change. Any change to the above awk code would be trivial and obvious while a change to the equivalent sed code would require first sacrificing a goat under a blood moon then breaking out your copy of the Rosetta Stone...
It's doable in awk, and maybe there's a slicker way than this. It looks for lines between and including those containing only blanks and either an open or close parenthesis, and processes them specially. Everything else it just prints:
awk '/^ *\( *$/,/^ *\) *$/ {
sub(/^ */, "");
sub(/ *$/, "");
if ($1 ~ /[()]/) hold = hold $1; else hold = hold " " $0
if ($0 ~ /\)/) {
sub(/\( /, "(", hold)
sub(/ \)/, ")", hold)
print hold
hold = ""
}
next
}
{ print }' data
The variable hold is initially empty.
The first pair of sub calls strip leading and trailing blanks (copying the data from the question, there's a blank after span 1 to). The if adds the ( or ) to hold without a space, or the line to hold after a space. If the close parenthesis is present, remove the space after the open parenthesis and before the close parenthesis, print hold, and reset hold to empty. Always skip the rest of the script with next. The rest of the script is { print } — print unconditionally, often written 1 by minimalists.
The file data is copy'n'paste from the data in the question.
Output:
Some text (possibly containing text within parenthesis).
Some other text
Another line (with something here) with some text
(Element 4)
Another line
(Element 1, span 1 to Element 5, span 4)
Another Line
The 'Another Line' (with capital L) has a trailing blank because the data in the question does.
With awk
$ cat fmt.awk
function rem_wsp(s) { # remove white spaces
gsub(/[\t ]/, "", s)
return s
}
function beg() {return rem_wsp($0)=="("}
function end() {return rem_wsp($0)==")"}
function dump_block() {
print "(" block ")"
}
beg() {
in_block = 1
next
}
end() {
dump_block()
in_block = block = ""
next
}
in_block {
if (length(block)>0) sep = " "
block = block sep $0
next
}
{
print
}
END {
if (in_block) dump_block()
}
Usage:
$ awk -f fmt.awk fime.dat
So I have a text file that contains a large number of lines. Each line is one long string with no spacing, however, the line contains several pieces of information. The program knows how to differentiate the important information in each line. The program identifies that the first 4 numbers/letters of the line coincide to a specific instrument. Here is a small example portion of the text file.
example text file
1002IPU3...
POIPIPU2...
1435IPU1...
1812IPU3...
BFTOIPD3...
1435IPD2...
As you can see, there are two lines that contain 1435 within this text file, which coincides with a specific instrument. However these lines are not identical. The program I'm using can not do its calculation if there are duplicates of the same station (ie, there are two 1435* stations). I need to find a way to search through my text files and identify if there are any duplicates of the partial strings that represent the stations within the file so that I can delete one or both of the duplicates. If I could have BASH script output the number of the lines containing the duplicates and what the duplicates lines say, that would be appreciated. I think there might be an easy way to do this, but I haven't been able to find any examples of this. Your help is appreciated.
If all you want to do is detect if there are duplicates (not necessarily count or eliminate them), this would be a good starting point:
awk '{ if (++seen[substr($0, 1, 4)] > 1) printf "Duplicates found : %s\n",$0 }' inputfile.txt
For that matter, it's a good starting point for counting or eliminating, too, it'll just take a bit more work...
If you want the count of duplicates:
awk '{a[substr($0,1,4)]++} END {for (i in a) {if(a[i]>1) print i": "a[i]}}' test.in
1435: 2
or:
{
a[substr($0,1,4)]++ # put prefixes to array and count them
}
END { # in the end
for (i in a) { # go thru all indexes
if(a[i]>1) print i": "a[i] # and print out the duplicate prefixes and their counts
}
}
Slightly roundabout but this should work-
cut -c 1-4 file.txt | sort -u > list
for i in `cat list`;
do
echo -n "$i "
grep -c ^"$i" file.txt #This tells you how many occurrences of each 'station'
done
Then you can do whatever you want with the ones that occur more than once.
Use following Python script(syntax of python 2.7 version used)
#!/usr/bin/python
file_name = "device.txt"
f1 = open(file_name,'r')
device = {}
line_count = 0
for line in f1:
line_count += 1
if device.has_key(line[:4]):
device[line[:4]] = device[line[:4]] + "," + str(line_count)
else:
device[line[:4]] = str(line_count)
f1.close()
print device
here the script reads each line and initial 4 character of each line are considered as device name and creates a key value pair device with key representing device name and value as line numbers where we find the string(device name)
following would be output
{'POIP': '2', '1435': '3,6', '1002': '1', '1812': '4', 'BFTO': '5'}
this might help you out!!
I would like to search through a file and find all instances where the last non-blank character is a comma and move the line below that up one. Essentially, undoing line continuations like
private static final double SOME_NUMBERS[][] = {
{1.0, -6.032174644509064E-23},
{-0.25, -0.25},
{-0.16624879837036133, -2.6033824355191673E-8}
};
and transforming that to
private static final double SOME_NUMBERS[][] = {
{1.0, -6.032174644509064E-23}, {-0.25, -0.25}, {-0.16624879837036133, -2.6033824355191673E-8}
};
Is there a good way to do this?
As mjswartz suggests in the comments, we need a sed substitution command like s/,\n/ /g. That, however, does not work by itself because, by default, sed reads in only one line at a time. We can fix that by reading in the whole file first and then doing the substitution:
$ sed 'H;1h;$!d;x; s/,[[:blank:]]*\n[[:blank:]]*/, /g;' file
private static final double SOME_NUMBERS[][] = {
{1.0, -6.032174644509064E-23}, {-0.25, -0.25}, {-0.16624879837036133, -2.6033824355191673E-8}
};
Because this reads in the whole file at once, this is not a good approach for huge files.
The above was tested with GNU sed.
How it works
H;1h;$!d;x;
This series of commands reads in the whole file. It is probably simplest to think of this as an idiom. If you really want to know the gory details:
H - Append current line to hold space
1h - If this is the first line, overwrite the hold space with it
$!d - If this is not the last line, delete pattern space and jump to the next line.
x - Exchange hold and pattern space to put whole file in pattern space
s/,[[:blank:]]*\n[[:blank:]]*/, /g
This looks for lines that end with a comma, optionally followed by blanks, followed by a newline and replaces that, and any leading space on the following line, with a comma and a single space.
I think for large files awk would be better:
awk -vRS=", *\n" -vORS=", " '1' file
On lua-shell, just write like this:
function nextlineup()
vim:normal("j^y$k$pjddk")
end
vim:open("code.txt")
vim:normal("G")
while vim:k() do
vim:normal("$")
if(vim.currc == string.byte(',')) nextlineup();
end
If you are not familier with vim ,this script seems a bit scary and not robust. In fact, every operation in it is precise(and much quicker, because tey are built-in functions).
Since you are processing a code file, i suggest you try it.
here is a demo
Here is a perl solution.
cat file | perl -e '{$c = 0; while () { s/^\s+/ / if ($c); s/,\s*$/,/; print($_); $c = (m/,\s*$/) ? 1: 0; }}'