[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: extended rx.el

From: Dave Love
Subject: Re: extended rx.el
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2004 11:33:49 +0100
User-agent: Gnus/5.1002 (Gnus v5.10.2) Emacs/21.2 (gnu/linux)

Stefan Monnier <address@hidden> writes:

> So you say that the unification is (repeat N &optional M &rest sexps)?
> Why not say it's either (repeat N SEXP) or (repeat N M SEXP ...) ?
> I.e. if there are more than 2 args, the second is MAX.
> That would be compatible with both rx and sregex, wouldn't it?

Yes, I guess.  Probably the issue was it breaks the model (and
implementation?) that basically replaced all SEXP with SEXP ... in the
forms.  I was quite likely being dense and probably did that when
virus-ridden.  If you're convinced it's OK to generalize, great.

reply via email to

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