Re: ELisp: special read syntax for regular expressions?

[Peter Dyballa]

Am 06.04.2008 um 23:38 schrieb Ilya Zakharevich:

> > Too much,
>
> CPerl/Microdocs/Faces menu entry explaines which faces are used for
> what (or see `cperl-tips-faces').  In your judgement, which constructs
> should be "glued" together into one face?

Separators (high-lighted? bold face?), parentheses used semantically  
(not as element to be matched or found), "modifiers" like s or m  
before and [egimosx] after the RegExp, referenced text (i.n., inside  
"(" and ")"), back-references, class specifications ("[:alpha:]") if  
not already referenced, other text.

It might be desirable to use in the from part darker shades of the  
colour than in the to part, i.e., <colour>3 in from and <colour>2 in  
to section. Since GNU Emacs has a very good undo function it might be  
better to emphasise on the from part, to think better about this, to  
achieve on first try the desired change. (At least I have to try more  
than once from time to time.)

> > too intense colours.  Using a shy colour for [:<type>:] is a =20=
> > good choice: this syntax is too easy.
>
> Thanks, but no thanks.  Please keep your comments which colors look
> good for you for your personal consumption (and/or your customization
> file).

There is good evidence found that different colours have different  
effect on humans. Blueish and greenish colours have a relaxing effect  
on the eye when used as a background colour on the computer screen  
(more exert muscle activity is needed to perceive text in reddish  
colour sharply). This also tells that text in blueish and greenish  
colour is easier sharply perceived, i.e., more visible, lighter to  
read as text with a certain meaning. Reddish colour does not seem to  
need text to become evident as a warning. (At least I do not read red  
text so often, for me it's OK that there is some, standing for "an  
error just happened!")

> >  =96 where is the RegExp
>
> Do not know what you mean here.

There are so many and different colours in use that I hardly can  
recognise any REs. I have the feeling that most lines of your  
examples are faulty, but I confess that I do not know all Perl  
RegExps by heart.

--
Greetings

  Pete

Imbecility, n.:
        A kind of divine inspiration, or sacred fire affecting
        censorious critics of this dictionary.
                        – Ambrose Bierce: _The Devil's Dictionary_