[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: rx.el sexp regexp syntax

From: Richard Stallman
Subject: Re: rx.el sexp regexp syntax
Date: Wed, 30 May 2018 23:53:16 -0400

[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]

  > > The clearer representation of structure is not the same thing as
  > > verbosity.  rx does both, but they are not the same thing.  We could
  > > envision making the structure more or less equally clear without
  > > making the patterns so long.

  > It's not clear to me how you'd do that. 

I don't see a specific way either, but someone might come up with a way.
I'm suggesting this as a topic of investigation.

  > and frankly being able to write 'bos' rather than remembering '\\`' or
  > 'symbol-start' rather than '\\_<' is a net win in my eyes.

I agree, as regards those.  On the other hand, those strings might not
be the best.  Maybe 'text<' and 'sym<' would be better.  We could
have a series of keywords, XYZ< and XYZ>, which would be as systematic
as now or more so, and shorter too.

Dr Richard Stallman
President, Free Software Foundation (https://gnu.org, https://fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]