[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Unquoted special characters in regexps
From: |
Luc Teirlinck |
Subject: |
Re: Unquoted special characters in regexps |
Date: |
Sun, 26 Feb 2006 10:41:47 -0600 (CST) |
Andreas Schwab wrote:
> According to the Elisp manual all these exhibit "poor practice" since
> you didn't quote the second `]'s.
It's a bug in the manual.
I propose the following patch to lispref/searching.texi, which I can
install if desired. I will wait till more people, in particular
Richard, have had an opportunity to see it.
Note that the current version already clearly states elsewhere that
`]' is special _inside_ character alternatives:
Note that the usual regexp special characters are not special
inside a character alternative. A completely different set of
characters is special inside character alternatives: `]', `-' and
`^'.
Apart from correcting the bug we are discussing, it also corrects
another misstatement:
For example, a string with unbalanced square brackets is invalid
(with a few exceptions, such as `[]]'),
That is incorrect as the examples below show.
ELISP> (string-match "]]]]" "]]]]")
0
ELISP> (string-match "[[]" "[")
0
One correct way to restate it would be that a string whose square
brackets _with special meaning in the context in which they are used _
do not balance is invalid. This would be (unless I overlook
something) without exceptions: in `[]]' the square brackets with
special meaning do balance. In the patch below I formulated it
differently.
None of my previous mails to emacs-{devel,pretest-bug} in the last few
days have appeared on the list, so I wonder whether this one will.
===File ~/searching.texi-diff===============================
*** searching.texi 06 Feb 2006 16:02:08 -0600 1.68
--- searching.texi 26 Feb 2006 10:25:06 -0600
***************
*** 237,243 ****
special constructs and the rest are @dfn{ordinary}. An ordinary
character is a simple regular expression that matches that character and
nothing else. The special characters are @samp{.}, @samp{*}, @samp{+},
! @samp{?}, @samp{[}, @samp{]}, @samp{^}, @samp{$}, and @samp{\}; no new
special characters will be defined in the future. Any other character
appearing in a regular expression is ordinary, unless a @samp{\}
precedes it.
--- 237,243 ----
special constructs and the rest are @dfn{ordinary}. An ordinary
character is a simple regular expression that matches that character and
nothing else. The special characters are @samp{.}, @samp{*}, @samp{+},
! @samp{?}, @samp{[}, @samp{^}, @samp{$}, and @samp{\}; no new
special characters will be defined in the future. Any other character
appearing in a regular expression is ordinary, unless a @samp{\}
precedes it.
***************
*** 740,747 ****
@kindex invalid-regexp
Not every string is a valid regular expression. For example, a string
! with unbalanced square brackets is invalid (with a few exceptions, such
! as @samp{[]]}), and so is a string that ends with a single @samp{\}. If
an invalid regular expression is passed to any of the search functions,
an @code{invalid-regexp} error is signaled.
--- 740,747 ----
@kindex invalid-regexp
Not every string is a valid regular expression. For example, a string
! that ends inside a character alternative without terminating @samp{]}
! is invalid, and so is a string that ends with a single @samp{\}. If
an invalid regular expression is passed to any of the search functions,
an @code{invalid-regexp} error is signaled.
============================================================
Message not available
Message not available
- Message not available
- Message not available
- Message not available
- Message not available
- Re: Unquoted special characters in regexps, Richard Stallman, 2006/03/04
- Re: Unquoted special characters in regexps, Luc Teirlinck, 2006/03/01
- Re: Unquoted special characters in regexps, Richard Stallman, 2006/03/02
- Re: Unquoted special characters in regexps, Luc Teirlinck, 2006/03/02
- Re: Unquoted special characters in regexps, Richard Stallman, 2006/03/02
Re: Unquoted special characters in regexps, martin rudalics, 2006/03/02
Re: Unquoted special characters in regexps, Luc Teirlinck, 2006/03/02
Re: Unquoted special characters in regexps, martin rudalics, 2006/03/03