* bug#60196: 29.0.60; re-builder should read all forms for the rx syntax
@ 2022-12-19 9:02 Kai Ma
2022-12-30 12:28 ` Mattias Engdegård
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Kai Ma @ 2022-12-19 9:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 60196
Severity: wishlist
re-builder (rx syntax) currently cannot read multiple forms. This
results in suboptimal user experience. For example, even though
(rx "<i>" (group (*? anychar)) "</i>")
is perfectly fine, but in re-builder, one has to write it as follows:
'(and "<i>" (group (*? anychar)) "</i>")
Ideally, re-builder should allow users to simply write
"<i>" (group (*? anychar)) "</i>"
(The relevant function seems to be 'reb-cook-regexp'.)
Kai
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread* bug#60196: 29.0.60; re-builder should read all forms for the rx syntax
2022-12-19 9:02 bug#60196: 29.0.60; re-builder should read all forms for the rx syntax Kai Ma
@ 2022-12-30 12:28 ` Mattias Engdegård
2022-12-30 13:45 ` Kai Ma
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Mattias Engdegård @ 2022-12-30 12:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Kai Ma; +Cc: 60196
The handling of rx input in re-builder is indeed unsatisfactory. We could adopt your proposed solution:
> Ideally, re-builder should allow users to simply write
>
> "<i>" (group (*? anychar)) "</i>"
which would be a definite improvement. We could also accept a Lisp expression that is evaluated, so that you'd write
(rx "<i>" (group (*? anychar)) "</i>")
On the surface this looks more verbose, but since re-builder itself would provide the `(rx )` boilerplate, there wouldn't actually be any more typing. The main advantage would be that regexps could be built up from smaller pieces:
(rx-let ((spaces (* " "))
(identifier (: alpha (* alnum))))
(rx identifier spaces "->" spaces identifier))
Either would be a definite improvement to the current rather strange re-builder behaviour with respect to rx input. Any preference?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread* bug#60196: 29.0.60; re-builder should read all forms for the rx syntax
2022-12-30 12:28 ` Mattias Engdegård
@ 2022-12-30 13:45 ` Kai Ma
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Kai Ma @ 2022-12-30 13:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mattias Engdegård; +Cc: 60196
> On Dec 30, 2022, at 20:28, Mattias Engdegård <mattiase@acm.org> wrote:
>
> The handling of rx input in re-builder is indeed unsatisfactory. We could adopt your proposed solution:
>
>> Ideally, re-builder should allow users to simply write
>>
>> "<i>" (group (*? anychar)) "</i>"
>
> which would be a definite improvement. We could also accept a Lisp expression that is evaluated, so that you'd write
>
> (rx "<i>" (group (*? anychar)) "</i>")
>
> On the surface this looks more verbose, but since re-builder itself would provide the `(rx )` boilerplate, there wouldn't actually be any more typing.
Good point! And it is much easier to copy a whole Sexpr.
> The main advantage would be that regexps could be built up from smaller pieces:
>
> (rx-let ((spaces (* " "))
> (identifier (: alpha (* alnum))))
> (rx identifier spaces "->" spaces identifier))
>
> Either would be a definite improvement to the current rather strange re-builder behaviour with respect to rx input. Any preference?
I like your proposal better! :-)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2022-12-30 13:45 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2022-12-19 9:02 bug#60196: 29.0.60; re-builder should read all forms for the rx syntax Kai Ma
2022-12-30 12:28 ` Mattias Engdegård
2022-12-30 13:45 ` Kai Ma
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).