I don't find this very useful. It's
too naïve for a real-world usecase.
I didn't look at the implementation, but the "classy party" looks like it simply matches for a sequence of 'a', 's', and 's' bytes in a string.
It would be better it it tokenized the sentence using punctuation and white-space as terminators. So, it would detect `big-ass sandwich` and `smart-ass person` but not `classy party` or `bass instrument`.
Furthermore, it would be cool if you created a configuration format for this kind of thing, so one could do something like this (excuse the config format, I realise it's probably shit and problematic):
[smart][big][fat]ass
!sex[ual]+education
which would detect all of the following: smartass, bigass, fatass,
and ass itself. The second rule would
not filter `sex(?:ual)` token followed by an `education` token. You get the idea
These are just some heat-of-the-moment ideas, because I think this is exciting and could be useful. :-)
I didn't look at the implementation, but the "classy party" looks like it simply matches for a sequence of 'a', 's', and 's' bytes in a string.
It would be better it it tokenized the sentence using punctuation and white-space as terminators. So, it would detect `big-ass sandwich` and `smart-ass person` but not `classy party` or `bass instrument`.
Furthermore, it would be cool if you created a configuration format for this kind of thing, so one could do something like this (excuse the config format, I realise it's probably shit and problematic):
which would detect all of the following: smartass, bigass, fatass, and ass itself. The second rule would not filter `sex(?:ual)` token followed by an `education` token. You get the ideaThese are just some heat-of-the-moment ideas, because I think this is exciting and could be useful. :-)