Re: extended rx.el

[Dave Love]

Stefan Monnier <address@hidden> writes:

>> I think taking the simple syntax symbols out of the alist in the first
>> change makes it less clear,
>
> I obviously disagree.  Also implementing it programmatically rather than
> via a manually managed table has the advantage of being
> automatically uptodate.

I'm not sure what it's meant to be automatically up-to-date with.  At
least the doc string of the table should be changed not to imply it's
complete.  (I say this still remembering my thought processes while
modifying it.)

>> and what's wrong with using `bracket' dynamically bound, purely locally
>> (the second change).
>
> And what's wrong with using an explicit prefix?

I think it makes it less obvious as basically a local variable.  I
don't understand why it needed to be changed.