I hate doing repetitive tasks by hand which should be easily automated and I can’t THINK of how to automate it quickly so I can get it over with and instead… have to do it by hand because it would take LONGER to come up with the automation than to do it by hand. This is 13 minutes sped up 48x into 16 seconds. 16 seconds is a reasonable speed for this (lining up 162 texts of different lengths side-to-side by one keyword they have in common]] but 13 minutes was annoying. I knew the code I needed t write: it’s the code that could execute what I did by hand. But writing the code would take longer than 13 minutes. [I didn’t know it would take 13 minutes to do this but I knew it would be longer than 13 minutes to write working code and executing it]. ugh. It’s over at least. [and afterwards, I found 6 missing pieces – only 156 instead of 162. Turns out 6 didn’t have the keyword. Were there faster ways? I know there are. Or must be. Can you set it up and run it in less than 14 minutes, including time figuring out and debugging the code? If so let me know. There’s other texts I’d like to align. I know there are concordances programs; I think I have one – but i don’t know it as well as I know excel, and learning time adds to the time cost. I won’t need this again for this project but I may in the future. Either way, my gripe is done and I’ve expressed it thusly. :)

I hate doing repetitive tasks by hand which should be easily automated and I can’t THINK of how to automate it quickly so I can get it over with and instead… have to do it by hand because it would take LONGER to come up with the automation than to do it by hand.

This is 13 minutes sped up 48x into 16 seconds.

16 seconds is a reasonable speed for this (lining up 162 texts of different lengths side-to-side by one keyword they have in common]] but 13 minutes was annoying.

I knew the code I needed t write: it’s the code that could execute what I did by hand. But writing the code would take longer than 13 minutes. [I didn’t know it would take 13 minutes to do this but I knew it would be longer than 13 minutes to write working code and executing it].

ugh. It’s over at least. [and afterwards, I found 6 missing pieces – only 156 instead of 162. Turns out 6 didn’t have the keyword.

Were there faster ways? I know there are. Or must be. Can you set it up and run it in less than 14 minutes, including time figuring out and debugging the code? If so let me know. There’s other texts I’d like to align. I know there are concordances programs; I think I have one – but i don’t know it as well as I know excel, and learning time adds to the time cost.

I won’t need this again for this project but I may in the future. Either way, my gripe is done and I’ve expressed it thusly. :)

===

I wouldn’t show it if I didn’t hope for some questions :)

I was going through classic Doctor Who and I came across some archived-no-longer-updated pages from the BBC website which turned out to be from a book about Doctor Who “Discontinuity” from 1995.

One fascinating feature it has is “Roots”. The Roots are “What influences are found in that episode?”

For example, maybe a line came from Shakespeare, or the story itself was a nod to an ancient Greek tragedy or a piece of pop culture at the time it was made.

I Love that kind of information so I wanted to extract it all and make a graph that shows all of the connections of things that I might know something about without *realizing* I know something about them simply because i’d seen all of Doctor Who in my life.

I don’t know if I’ll complete the project but it was a passing thought I wanted to explore a little last night and this was one of the tasks to get there. [after downloading all of the pages from the BBC with this information, converting them to text and putting them into Excel].

 

===

The phrase, “If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail”? Excel is my hammer for a lot of things.

====

 

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


four − 3 =

Leave a Reply