Rating: 
Summary: More author clarification
Review: Added note: The review by phrodod was quite nice, IMO. One little thing: s/he mentions my little re_show() utility that I use in the regex tutorial. While phrodod grants leniency in allowing that it is fine if the utility is not of use beyond the examples... my little wrapper proves better than that even. Specifically, the rather nice Python library PEAK chose to incorporate the exact 3-line utility function (with acknowledgments to me) to help user explore regexen. PEAK, of course, is vastly more interesting than my miniscule and accidental contribution to it :-).
-----
I felt the review from "A reader from Germany" below rather missed the point of my book. Don't buy it if the book is not right for you, most certainly. But I wonder how that reader got such an entirely inaccurate set of expectations about the book.
For example, s/he wrote:
> This book is not for people that are new to programming.
However, if you buy the book from Amazon (here), the very first thing you see in the Editorial Reviews section is:
> Written for experienced programmers...
So it seems odd for the above reader to be negatively surprised by the target audience. If s/he bought it at a brick-and-morter store, the back cover pretty much says the same thing.
Moreover, the reader mentioned also seems not to understand the meaning of the title:
> The title of the book is very much missleading too.
> If you think that the book has anything to do with
> text processing in the sense of linguistics, you are
> mistaken.
I'm not sure how anyone would think that the phrase "text processing" is supposed to mean "computational linguistics." There are a couple overlaps between the fields. And you probably need a bit of text processing to extract useful corpora for computational linguistics. But the ordinary meaning of the words makes it clear that these are quite different areas of specialty. Actually, I just wrote an IBM developerWorks article introducing the Natural Language Toolkit (for Python). Anyone who is interested in computational linguistics and Python should take a look at that library.
I wonder if the "from Germany" description of the reader indicates the s/he translated the English title slightly wrongly. I can kinda imagine that across languages the field distinction could get lost.
And finally:
> ...really mad to find out that the book is available online too.
This one rather upsets me. I provide a service for readers--both those who pay for the printed copy and those who read it online for free (or make a voluntary donation online). The reader is *mad* that I give away something for free that I was under no obligation to (and even wrestled slightly with my publisher to make sure I could do so)!? If s/he doesn't want the free copy, I don't see how s/he's forced to download it!
Rating:
Summary: Author comment on "smart ASCII" examples
Review: Confessedly, writing this little note was inspired by an article on authors who pseudonymously or anonymously review their own books. I find that a bit dishonest, so you should see my name here.Maybe this is a quibble, but I found the review by jluc_ from Vancouver, BC Canada to miss one point. S/he has some criticisms of the organization and focus that I won't argue with (obviously, my own take is different). But there is also a remark that: "For example, he uses smart ASCII formatting examples several times. Does he _clearly_ define that format somewhere? Nope, the reader is assumed to magically know/guess its syntax, though several entries for "smart ASCII" in the index will first lead him to believe a definition does exist in the book." It is quite true--and quite deliberate--that I omit any formal description of smart ASCII from the book. For a real world example of the format, you can look at the online version of the whole book itself at [http://gnosis.cx/TPiP/], which is in this format. But there is no official grammar of the markup (though the parser chapters do this partially, as a way of explaining parsers, not the format. In my real work experience, text formats I encounter are RARELY completely and accurately documented. Rather, the tools I have written in my life have treated formats in a heuristic and seat-of-the-pants way, typically based only on some examples of a format. In using the smart ASCII format for various examples, I want to put readers in a mind to exactly this sort of real-world experience. Don't sweat the lack of formal documentation, just get to work with the programming!
Rating:
Summary: Author comment on "smart ASCII" examples
Review: Confessedly, writing this little note was inspired by an article on authors who pseudonymously or anonymously review their own books. I find that a bit dishonest, so you should see my name here. Maybe this is a quibble, but I found the review by jluc_ from Vancouver, BC Canada to miss one point. S/he has some criticisms of the organization and focus that I won't argue with (obviously, my own take is different). But there is also a remark that: "For example, he uses smart ASCII formatting examples several times. Does he _clearly_ define that format somewhere? Nope, the reader is assumed to magically know/guess its syntax, though several entries for "smart ASCII" in the index will first lead him to believe a definition does exist in the book." It is quite true--and quite deliberate--that I omit any formal description of smart ASCII from the book. For a real world example of the format, you can look at the online version of the whole book itself at [http://gnosis.cx/TPiP/], which is in this format. But there is no official grammar of the markup (though the parser chapters do this partially, as a way of explaining parsers, not the format. In my real work experience, text formats I encounter are RARELY completely and accurately documented. Rather, the tools I have written in my life have treated formats in a heuristic and seat-of-the-pants way, typically based only on some examples of a format. In using the smart ASCII format for various examples, I want to put readers in a mind to exactly this sort of real-world experience. Don't sweat the lack of formal documentation, just get to work with the programming!
Rating: 
Summary: Great Python book for Professionals
Review: David takes a fresh take on programming and esp. programming with python. He combines OO and functional styles to create programs that are shorter and easier to understand. In addition to providing documentation and examples of python modules related to text processing, David says just as much about good programming style. He shows how OO programming is more than just about smart data, i.e. it is more about what services objects provide, that your coding style should test for services the object provides rather than trying to find out what it is. David also addresses issues specific to Perl/Python like Schwartzian sort, which should greatly help if sorting is the bottleneck in your code. I must confess I have not read the state machine stuff yet as I am thoroughly enjoying all the other stuff little by little. If you are a professional Python programmer you should definitely get this book.
Rating:
Summary: More author clarification
Review: I felt the review from "A reader from Germany" below rather missed the point of my book. Don't buy it if the book is not right for you, most certainly. But I wonder how that reader got such an entirely inaccurate set of expectations about the book. For example, s/he wrote: > This book is not for people that are new to programming. However, if you buy the book from Amazon (here), the very first thing you see in the Editorial Reviews section is: > Written for experienced programmers... So it seems odd for the above reader to be negatively surprised by the target audience. If s/he bought it at a brick-and-morter store, the back cover pretty much says the same thing. Moreover, the reader mentioned also seems not to understand the meaning of the title: > The title of the book is very much missleading too.
> If you think that the book has anything to do with
> text processing in the sense of linguistics, you are
> mistaken. I'm not sure how anyone would think that the phrase "text processing" is supposed to mean "computational linguistics." There are a couple overlaps between the fields. And you probably need a bit of text processing to extract useful corpora for computational linguistics. But the ordinary meaning of the words makes it clear that these are quite different areas of specialty. Actually, I just wrote an IBM developerWorks article introducting the Natural Language Toolkit (for Python). Anyone who is interested in computational linguistics and Python should take a look at that library (and my article, once it comes out). I wonder if the "from Germany" description of the reader indicates the s/he translated the English title slightly wrongly. I can kinda imagine that across languages the field distinction could get lost. And finally: > ...really mad to find out that the book is available online too. This one rather upsets me. I provide a service for readers--both those who pay for the printed copy and those who read it online for free (or make a voluntary donation online). The reader is *mad* that I give away something for free that I was under no obligation to (and even wrestled slightly with my publisher to make sure I could do so)!? If s/he doesn't want the free copy, I don't see how s/he's forced to download it!
Rating:
Summary: What is this book about?
Review: In any booksotre you'd probably find hundreds of titles of "Web programming in XXX language". What about "Text processing in XXX language"? From Amazon's similar items the only book that remotely resemble this is the "Python & XML". This is indeed a unique title.
Why do we care about text processing? The author said it is arguably what most programmer spend most time doing. Text is the basis of most Internet communications protocol. Most computer "data" often comes down to "text. And Python is a powerful language for this task.
What can you find in this book?
Advanced Python programming technique
Python is a simple language on the surface. As an expert programmer the author really show you great techniques in solving actual problems. This is in contrast to most other Python books that cover only the language basis. It is also one of a few book that covers functional programming style. The other book that you maybe interested in is the "Python Cookbook".
Algorithms
You'll find a number of useful algorithm here and there. There is only some brief introduction to computer language theory. On the other hand some third party parser tools are well covered.
Internet protocols and data format
Several standard Python modules as well as useful third party tools for handling Internet protocols and data format is introduced. (But not much about the protocol themselves).
There are places where author would jump into detail without giving enough introduction. In p.5 a number of higher-order functions are defined without explanation. The "smart ASCII" format is used to illustrate several different progamming tools but the format itself is never defined. What could be very interesting topics instead leave readers bewildered.
I find this book a bag of tricks where author's experience and opinion are most valuable. Despite some short coming this is one advanced book that help improve your progamming technique to a higher level.
Rating:
Summary: Good stuff.
Review: Python is great. The author does a nice job with text processing. I liked the author's honest perspective on FP.
Learned a thing or two.
Rating:
Summary: Good stuff.
Review: Python is great. The author does a nice job with text processing. I liked the author's honest perspective on FP.
Learned a thing or two.
Rating:
Summary: This book gets very positive review on net
Review: Ron Stephens has a very positive review of this book,
which you can find searching for "Ron Stephens python review".
He found it to be well written, well thought, and well published.
Rating: 
Summary: flawed, but unique subject coverage, at for Python books
Review: The author clearly knows his subject. His capacity to communicate it to Joe Programmer is more doubtful. For example, he uses smart ASCII formatting examples several times. Does he _clearly_ define that format somewhere? Nope, the reader is assumed to magically know/guess its syntax, though several entries for "smart ASCII" in the index will first lead him to believe a definition does exist in the book. Your mileage may vary, but I found the explanations difficult to "get" and not very informative. The code is admittedly better. At 470+ pages, it is not a small book. Still, some core subjects are covered too lightly, with just enough coverage to whet your appetite and not enough to let you be productive right away. The chapter on the Python SimpleParse utility (on SourceForge) is a case in point: the program is very interesting, but sparsely documented. This book's coverage did not add much to the existing documentation. The first 100 or so pages cover some more or less relevant standard Python modules. Something other, more general, Python books do just as well, if not better. Thirty or more pages near the end are "a short impressionistic review of Python". What for? This book is not supposed to teach you Python, it is supposed to be a book about text processing, using Python. Additionally, the author has a great fondness for Functional Programming and talks about it at length as well. Bully for you if you like FP, too bad if you don't. If you are willing to put up with its quirks the book does cover a subject that few others do. However, a firmer hand from its editor would have resulted in a much better book.
| 
