[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Stupid module and pregexp questions

From: tomas
Subject: Re: Stupid module and pregexp questions
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 19:53:42 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.3i

On Mon, Apr 28, 2003 at 11:06:24AM -0500, Rob Browning wrote:
> MJ Ray <address@hidden> writes:


[about letting configure find whatever regexp lib is there]

> If so, then it'd be nice to have a truly invariant regex
> lib that we can rely on.  Without that, it's hard to write portable
> scripts.



> In the end, I'd just like to have a powerful regex lib whose syntax
> and behavior is invariant across all the platforms on which I'm likely
> to run guile.
> Thoughts?

Call me conservative, what not. I'd think You'd Write A Regexp Lib In C (TM).

Apart from that, pregexp shows how a good Scheme interface to a regexp
library might look like. I mean: having an S-expression syntax for
regexps (and having the string variant just as a convenient shorthand
notation) gives you the power to automated construction of regexps.

What I have missed most is a streams like interface: in comes a stream
of chars, out a stream of matches. Has anyone seen something like this?

Have a look to the contortions needed in Perl to do this.

This are my random ramblings. But you asked for input ;-)

-- tomas

reply via email to

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