Commands Possibly Using filePro File Names

[Lerebours, Jose]

Bob posted:

>On Thu, Mar 31, 2005 at 05:56:51AM -0600, Lerebours, Jose wrote:
> | Bob posted:
> [snip]
> | > While most of them are associated with LOOKUP, it's possible
> | > that the LOOKUP doesn't use an alias, so all are significant.
> | > 
> | > I'm writing an AWK program to edit/change the filePro File Names
> | > in all processing tables on a system, and wanted to save time by
> | > not working on Processing Table lines where a filePro File Name
> | > would not be of interest.
> | > 
> | > This information lets me build a regular expression allowing me
> | > to skip processing all lines where fPname1 won't possibly be
> | > required to be changed to fPname2.
> [snip]
> | 
> | If you intend to swap file names from fpname1 to fpname2, why
> | would there be an exeption?  Of course, unless you intend to
> | swap names only if used in certain fashion.
> 
> You don't understand the problem.  I want to change nameA to nameB,
> nameC to nameD, nameE to nameF ... nameY to nameZ, so I can skip
> the processing that does that on processing table lines that can't
> possibly have a filePro File Name on them.
> 

You are right, I am failing to understand the reasoning behind all
this.  If you want to replace nameY to nameZ, why are you looking
for nameY ONLY while within one of the functions/commands you are
looking for?

The only reason I can think of is if you have names such as:

inv, sales, orders, phones, customers, accounts, invoices, daily,
calendar, bills, vendors, activity, etc.

and these can be found as part of a string where the file name 
itself has nothing to do with it.  Even worst, if you have a file 
named sales and another named salesh, you would face a potential
problem changing sales to salesX as salesh could change to salesXh.


> | Here is a script you can use to get the job done:
> [snip]
> 
> Thanks for the 182 line sed script, but it can't do what I want,

The script does change STRINGX to STRINGY pretty well.

> and using AWK I can do what I want in less than 100 lines, while
> editing the table in place - without creating temporary files.
> 

I never doubted you could do your own.  

Regards;


Jose Lerebours