@Pixel
Thanks for the code !!!
I realise what I had done wrong now, I was filtering way to hard. I also had never tried starting with anything other than A so obviously there was a lot to delete before getting any hits.
I have reduced my filtering somewhat and starting from B it now works, thank you for your help.
M@lik
Please see above, thats what I was doing wrong...thanks.
OK I have some Regular Expression code to share here which as I said before is almost exactly like M@liks but not for SED. I had to take out the backslash for my interpreter to work.
This bit is the consecutive one.
This bit is for n occurrences per line.
The reason these may be useful is that they can be used to filter an already generated list.... Hope it helps.
On the subject of how hard to filter can I get some agreement from you two ?
It would seem that we should allow 2 consecutive characters together and no more than 2 per line. Do you both agree ? I think any more or less defeats the object of filtering.
However I do like Pixels idea about not allowing consecutive alphabetical order either. Nice one !
Comments please...
Thanks for the code !!!
I realise what I had done wrong now, I was filtering way to hard. I also had never tried starting with anything other than A so obviously there was a lot to delete before getting any hits.
I have reduced my filtering somewhat and starting from B it now works, thank you for your help.
M@lik
Please see above, thats what I was doing wrong...thanks.
OK I have some Regular Expression code to share here which as I said before is almost exactly like M@liks but not for SED. I had to take out the backslash for my interpreter to work.
This bit is the consecutive one.
Code:
(.)\1
This bit is for n occurrences per line.
Code:
(.).*\1
The reason these may be useful is that they can be used to filter an already generated list.... Hope it helps.
On the subject of how hard to filter can I get some agreement from you two ?
It would seem that we should allow 2 consecutive characters together and no more than 2 per line. Do you both agree ? I think any more or less defeats the object of filtering.
However I do like Pixels idea about not allowing consecutive alphabetical order either. Nice one !
Comments please...