From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Drew Adams Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#26338: 26.0.50; Collect all matches for REGEXP in current buffer Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2017 08:54:44 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <1258a7b8-6c73-4cef-ab23-bc324a2c6f12@default> References: <8737dr6kxx.fsf@calancha-pc> <87h926cvgl.fsf@localhost> <87k272ow7g.fsf@calancha-pc> <87fuhpcbem.fsf@localhost> <87lgrheyvn.fsf@calancha-pc> <87pogsmefn.fsf@jane> <871st6342v.fsf@localhost> <87a87sqnpn.fsf@calancha-pc> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1491580533 14024 195.159.176.226 (7 Apr 2017 15:55:33 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2017 15:55:33 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 26338@debbugs.gnu.org, Juri Linkov , Marcin Borkowski , Dmitry Gutov To: Noam Postavsky , Tino Calancha Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Apr 07 17:55:28 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cwWEC-0001XF-S5 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 07 Apr 2017 17:55:12 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:51564 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cwWEI-0004GH-Or for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 07 Apr 2017 11:55:18 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:57448) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cwWE6-0004BR-Va for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 07 Apr 2017 11:55:08 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cwWE3-0003JD-3K for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 07 Apr 2017 11:55:07 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:38511) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cwWE2-0003Iz-Vu for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 07 Apr 2017 11:55:03 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cwWE2-0002QK-Jy for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 07 Apr 2017 11:55:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Drew Adams Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 07 Apr 2017 15:55:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 26338 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 26338-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B26338.14915804999301 (code B ref 26338); Fri, 07 Apr 2017 15:55:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 26338) by debbugs.gnu.org; 7 Apr 2017 15:54:59 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36710 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cwWDy-0002Pw-Qo for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 07 Apr 2017 11:54:59 -0400 Original-Received: from aserp1040.oracle.com ([141.146.126.69]:42483) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cwWDw-0002Pj-Ll for 26338@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 07 Apr 2017 11:54:57 -0400 Original-Received: from aserv0021.oracle.com (aserv0021.oracle.com [141.146.126.233]) by aserp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2) with ESMTP id v37FsnmR005266 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 7 Apr 2017 15:54:50 GMT Original-Received: from aserv0121.oracle.com (aserv0121.oracle.com [141.146.126.235]) by aserv0021.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.14.4) with ESMTP id v37FsmYK027267 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 7 Apr 2017 15:54:48 GMT Original-Received: from abhmp0006.oracle.com (abhmp0006.oracle.com [141.146.116.12]) by aserv0121.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id v37FskYM028985; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 15:54:47 GMT In-Reply-To: X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.9.1 (1003210) [OL 12.0.6753.5000 (x86)] X-Source-IP: aserv0021.oracle.com [141.146.126.233] X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 208.118.235.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:131339 Archived-At: > Regarding Drew's concerns about extending cl-loop with more non-Common > Lisp things, I just don't see that as a problem. It depends on what one considers "a problem". I think it is a problem for `cl-', which was intended for Common Lisp emulation, to become a dumping ground for anyone's idea of a cool thing to add to Emacs. That's not what it's for. We've already had a couple of things unrelated to CL that were misguidedly added to `cl-'. We should not continue that practice (and we really should remove those from the `cl-' namespace). There is nothing preventing Emacs from adding any constructs it wants. There just is no reason why the `cl-' namespace (and the `cl*.el' files) should be polluted with stuff that is not Common Lisp emulation. A user of `cl-loop' should be able to expect Common Lisp `loop', or as close to it as we can get. > I suppose it would be nice to have a more easily extensible > looping macro, like iterate [1]. That would be quite a bit > of work though. As for `iterate': If this is what you mean: https://common-lisp.net/project/iterate/ then I'm all in favor of it. I much prefer it to `loop'. But I don't see anyone stepping forward to add it to Emacs. Even then, I would probably prefer that we add it to the `cl-' namespace and stay as close as possible to emulating the Common Lisp `iterate' (no, it is not part of the CL language, but yes, it is something developed for/with CL). There are lots of users of CL, and lots of CL code. Both should find a simple, straightforward path to Emacs. We should minimize any differences between Emacs emulations and the things being emulated. But again, nothing prevents Emacs adding a different construct that does exactly what you want, with all the bells and whistles you think are improvements over `loop' or `iterate' or whatever. That should not be in the `cl-' namespace, and we should not confuse users by passing it off as (even a partial) emulation of a Common Lisp construct. That's all. Just one opinion.