Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 7 years ago.
This post was edited and submitted for review 6 months ago and failed to reopen the post:
Original close reason(s) were not resolved
Improve this question
I am writing a program that needs a list of English words as a source file for it to work. I realise that these source files are available for students writing games such as Hangman or Crossword solvers but I am having trouble locating such a source file and wonder if anyone knows how I can attain one without slowly scraping websites and building up a dictionary manually.
What about /usr/share/dict/words on any Unix system? How many words are we talking about? Like OED-Unabridged?
For an English dictionary .txt file, you can use Custom Dictionary.
You can also generate a list aspell or wordlist with own settings.
Also you can take a look at http://wordlist.sourceforge.net/
Only english words: http://www.math.sjsu.edu/~foster/dictionary.txt
Also take a look at:
http://wordlist.sourceforge.net/
http://www.math.sjsu.edu/~foster/dictionary.txt
350,000 words
Very late, but might be useful for others.
There's also WordNet. Its data files format are well-documented.
I used it for building an embeddable dictionary library for iOS developers (www.lexicontext.com) and also in one of my apps.
#Future-searchers: you can use aspell to do the dictionary checks, it has bindings in ruby and python. It would make your job much simpler.
Related
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 4 years ago.
Improve this question
I wrote a program, and I'd like to write a manpage for it.
I started to learn Groff, and I really find it awful. The man macros are difficult to understand, difficult to use, and a real obstacle to productivity. The mdoc macros add a nice "semantic" extension, but they still suffer of limitations which make it incredibly hard. The resulting "code" is poor in maintainability.
Of course I know I can convert any modern markup language (say Markdown) into manpages via pandoc, but I dislike the result, and I'm not that fond of adding pandoc as dependency of my project, anyway.
Is there a way to obtain a decent manpage from a reasonable markup language?
I write manpages for the bash and ruby scripts I write.
I format them in markdown, which is a popular and simple text format.
Then I use a ruby gem called ronn to process the markdown into groff format with man macros. Ronn can also output html from the same markdown source.
OP here. After checking some alternatives, I decided to go for Asciidoc.
There are many alternatives indeed. For example, check this other question.
I also realized that there's no good answer to this question, given the fact that many tools can be used, and in the end it is just a matter of taste :)
I'll just vote for closing my own question (if anything it will remain as reference).
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
I'm not quite sure if stackoverflow is the correct site to post this on, but i dont see any other better fit for it when it comes to the stack exchange sites.
Vim has a lot of documentation, everything from free books to interactive learning, but there seems to be a piece missing, at least from what i can see.
Despite all the documentation im unable to find a complete list of all options that can be specified in a .vimrc file, does anyone know where this is documented ? It is not documented in :help vimrc or any other documentation ive seen, not even the free books ive looked at. The vim tricks wiki gives an intro like so many other pages on the web, but thats about it..no page or documentation seems to list all available options for the vimrc file. The man page doesnt even list a single option, only usage and command line options.
The books and other documentation are good at mentioning how to use vim but not how to configure the configuration file.
So, does someone know where i can find a complete list of all available options in the vimrc file ?
:help 'option' will take you to the documentation of any option. All of those are contained in a single documentation file named option.txt.
Additionally, you can obtain a special report that shows all options, a short help, and the current values via
:options
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 6 years ago.
Improve this question
A friend is in search of a method to translate SPSS 'syntax' files to semantically equivalent R source code files.
I suppose, no one ever wrote a translator. But maybe I'm wrong.
PS: Please excuse the wrong use of 'syntax': People using SPSS tend to name an SPSS source program a 'syntax file' ;-)
The short answer is that sorry, you are right, there is no tool for automatically translating SPSS script to R script. Even worse, such a tool would likely take several (many?) man-years to create, so don't hold your breath.
A small concession is that it is probably not to hard to create a tool for translating very small, specific subsets of SPSS to R. For example, if you have a chunk of code for reading in CSV files, then you could use regular expressions to extract the useful bits from the SPSS code and autogenerate some R code from them. In most instances however it will be far easier and faster to manually port the code yourself.
If all else fails, ask Bob Muenchen; he know a lot about porting SPSS to R.
Another option for this is SPSStoR, which claims to be able to translate many common (but basic) SPSS procedures to R code. It seems to be under active development on GitHub as of August 2014.
I know it's been more than 3 years after the question was originally asked, but it's worth noting that a German company by the name of eoda is actually working on such software. It's called translateR. It is currently in beta status and you can register for a beta test on their website.
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 5 years ago.
Improve this question
I have to search inside PDF files for an upcoming (ASP.NET MVC) project in shared hosting environment. What is the best solution? Any third part product?
Lucene is a popular choice. See Lucene FAQ on searching pdfs.
Lucene is a good choice - for ASP.NET, using Lucene.NET is the best bet. Lucene is an indexing engine only, meaning you'll have to provide it with the text from the PDF. If you have access to the web server, you can install an IFilter for this (I recommend Foxit's PDF filter). Otherwise you'll have to get hold of some code to use on your website to parse and filter the PDF.
Docotic.Pdf library can help with such task.
The library could be used to extract text (with or without formatting). The extracted text can be used to create an index. You can even use String.IndexOf method if you just want to know if a PDF file contains a given text.
The library can also retrieve a collection of words with their bounding rectangles from PDFs. This might be useful if you need to know exact position of a text in a file.
Disclaimer: I work for the vendor of the library.
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 1 year ago.
Improve this question
Are there any alternatives to The CMU Pronouncing Dictionary, commercial or open source?
I don't believe the answer is definitively "no," but I do know that CMU is the most popular pronouncing dictionary in my anecdotal experience. I believe it is open source so if it's missing something, perhaps you could find a way to add it (or request it be added).
Barring that, I would check with the folks at Language Log. They deal a lot with phonetics.
I am searching for something similar, too. Next to it I found http://www.voxforge.org/home/downloads
There is CELEX 2, available from the Linguistic Data Consortium, which contains phonology information and costs $300. The problem is that it's a little dated, and the English dictionary is BE, not AE.
You can use CALLHOME, too, but with $2250 it's more more expensive than CELEX.
forvo.com. Free and open.
I found DictionaryForMIDs and desktionary. I haven't used either but both are open source.
Checkout Merriam-Webster for things like this:
stack
overflow