Does anybody know what dictionary UITextChecker pulls from? I use it to verify that a word is in fact a valid word in an app. I have some questions from users about why specific words are available in other games (Boggle/Scrabble) but not in mine.
Examples: ai, qi, qat, xu, ae, tae, ait, ain, lav, aa, shh, za
I checked against /usr/share/dict/words and none of these words are in Websters Second International, so maybe UITextChecker uses this same source? They do show up in other dictionaries online (but this is really besides the point of the post).
Thanks for any insight!
UITextChecker may be using the same dictionary that UIReferenceLibraryViewController uses. In which case, you could use something like [UIReferenceLibraryViewController dictionaryHasDefinitionForTerm: #"term"] and if it returns true the word exists. I'm not sure how complete the built in dictionary is however.
I guess it uses the iPhone dictionary of the user, which depends on the current language/NSLocale the user is using (which is set in the "International" Settings on the iPhone). This is the behavior we observe when typing some text anywhere in the iPhone, words underlined in read (because detected by the internal UITextChecker) depends on the locale used.
If the user have activated multiple keyboards with different languages each (e.g. a French AZERTY keyboard and an US QWERTY keyboard) it depends obviously on the current language, namely the current keyboard active at this moment.
If you refer to the wordfeud dictionary... (that would be the only game I know those words from). They check their words from an online dictionary on their own server. Must be a list parsed from another spelling site or something.
I sometimes doubt the validity of some words though....
Related
I have some words in my language (German) that seem to be valid according to TexStudios spellchecker.
However they must not be used for my thesis (and globally for me at least).
Is it possible to add words to a list, that trigger a (optimally huge) sign "DO NOT USE THIS!" or even prevent compilation in Latex when such words are used?
I'm looking for something like a negative dictionary.
I've seen files like "badwords" or "stopwords" but don't know when/how they are used. I can freely use them although "check for bad words" is on.
In case anyone else has the problem: Badword files are named after the main language. For me it happened that I have "de_DE_frami" as the dictionary set. Hence it did not use the "de_DE.badwords".
For a good highlighting: One can change the appearance in the options dialog (syntaxhighlighting->badwords) and make it e.g. background red, size 200%
I'd still would like to have a "bad" words and a "impossible" words distinction as you can sometimes not avoid "bad" words or they are not bad in all contexts.
I'm working on an iOS app that involves user input, and I'd like to keep it kid-friendly. One of the main features of the app is that user inputted titles and phrases can be shown to everyone who uses the app.
When a user creates a new title I want to verify that it is safe-for-work. My initial thought was just to have a list of all profane words and verify that none of them exist in the title:
for bad_word in list_of_bad_words:
if bad_word in user_inputted_title:
// Complain to user!
// Title is okay.
I imagine that there must be libraries or best practices for doing this. People could easily substitute numbers for letters, and I'm sure there are sequences of SFW words that create inappropriate phrases.
Can anyone suggest a better way of doing this? Specifically, if there are any Swift tools that would be awesome!
There are some cocoapods for this:
https://github.com/IslandOfDoom/IODProfanityFilter
https://github.com/MaxKramer/SCRProfanityChecker
I haven't used either of these personally, but I hope these can be a good starting point. The first one replaces any profanity with asterisks, and the second can give you the range of the profanity so you can replace it with your own filler. Good luck.
I have a list of approx 100,000 names I need to process. Some are business names, some are people names. Unfortunately, some are lower, some are upper, and some are mixed. I am looking for a routine to convert them to proper case. (Sometimes called Mixed or Title case). I realize I can just loop through the string and capitalize every character that starts a new word. That would be an incredibly simplistic approach. For businesses, short words should be lowercase (of, with, for, ...). For last names, if it starts with Mc, the 3rd letter should be capitalized (McDermot, McDonald, etc). Roman numerals should always be capitalized (John Smith II ), etc.
I have not been able to find any Delphi built in, or otherwise, routines. Surely this is out there. Where can I find this?
Thanks
As it was already said by others, making a fully automated routine for this is nearly impossible due to so many special variations. So leaving out the human interaction completely is almost impossible.
Now what you can do instead is to make this much easier for human to solve. How? Make a dictionary of all the name variations in Lowercase and present it to him.
Before presenting the names you can make sure that the first letter in any of the names is already capitalized.
Once all name correction has been made in dictionary you go and automatically replace all the names in original database.
I am using DDMathParser in my app, and have recently come across the need to get occurrences of any group of numbers within a () parentheses bracket thingy (very highly technical!). For example, I would need to get (6+5) out of 6+7/8(6+5). Specifically, I would like to be able to do this so that I can make (56+9)sqrt compile just as well as sqrt(56+9). Any help?
P.S. I know that the maker of DDMathParser is often sighted in this neck of the woods. I am secretly hoping that he will come to the rescue and either fix my problem so I can implement it myself or him make it part of DDMathParser! :)
So, I've thought a lot about this question since you posted it a month ago. From what I understand, you're constructing a string as the user clicks/taps buttons.
I think this is your problem.
As the user taps buttons, you should be constructing (or modifying) DDExpression objects. This is the "pure" format of a math expression, whereas a string is lossy and difficult to manipulate. The string you show to the user should be generated from the DDExpression tree you're building.
This is a complex problem, and I'm still not entirely sure how I would go about implementing this, but this is the root of how I'd do it. I would not just construct a string based on what the user types.
I've done some Google searching but couldn't find what I was looking for.
I'm developing a scrabble-type word game in rails, and was wondering if there was a simple way to validate what the player inputs in the game is actually a word. They'd be typing the word out.
Is validation against some sort of English language dictionary database loaded within the app best way to solve this problem? If so, are there any libraries that offer this kind of functionality? If not, what would you suggest?
Thanks for your help!
You need two things:
a word list
some code
The word list is the tricky part. On most Unix systems there's a word list at /usr/share/dict/words or /usr/dict/words -- see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Words_(Unix) for more details. The one on my Mac has 234,936 words in it. But they're not all valid Scrabble words. So you'd have to somehow acquire a Scrabble dictionary, make sure you have the right license to use it, and process it so it's a text file.
(Update: The word list for LetterPress is now open source, and available on GitHub.)
The code is no problem in the simple case. Here's a script I whipped up just now:
words = {}
File.open("/usr/share/dict/words") do |file|
file.each do |line|
words[line.strip] = true
end
end
p words["magic"]
p words["saldkaj"]
This will output
true
nil
I leave it as an exercise for the reader to make it into a proper Words object. (Technically it's not a Dictionary since it has no definitions.) Or to use a DAWG instead of a hash, even though a hash is probably fine for your needs.
A piece of language-agnostic advice here, is that if you only care about the existence of a word (which in such a case, you do), and you are planning to load the entire database into the application (which your query suggests you're considering) then a DAWG will enable you to check the existence in O(n) time complexity where n is the size of the word (dictionary size has no effect - overall the lookup is essentially O(1)), while being a relatively minimal structure in terms of memory (indeed, some insertions will actually reduce the size of the structure, a DAWG for "top, tap, taps, tops" has fewer nodes than one for "tops, tap").