From: Luc Teirlinck <teirllm@dms.auburn.edu>
Cc: stephen@xemacs.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org, xemacs-design@xemacs.org
Subject: Re: Rationale for split-string?
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 14:32:41 -0500 (CDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200304171932.h3HJWfS08739@eel.dms.auburn.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200304171744.h3HHiJCx009215@rum.cs.yale.edu> (monnier+gnu/emacs@rum.cs.yale.edu)
Stefan Monnier wrote:
A gross hack is to test if the last char of the regexp is ?+
and if so get rid of empty strings at start and end.
It should take care of 99% of the cases.
If you can not decide which of the two types of behavior is more
useful, would it not be more logical to have the behavior depend on
some optional new argument with the old behavior the default, so that
no existing code gets broken? Gross hacks that "should" take care of
99% of the cases usually turn out to take care of something that looks
more like 66% or even 50%. Making the behavior depend on the last
character of the regexp just looks like a very messy imprecise
heuristic.
Sincerely,
Luc.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-04-17 19:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-04-17 9:06 Rationale for split-string? Stephen J. Turnbull
2003-04-17 11:30 ` Stefan Reichör
2003-04-18 1:54 ` Richard Stallman
2003-04-18 2:59 ` Steve Youngs
2003-04-17 17:44 ` Stefan Monnier
2003-04-17 19:32 ` Luc Teirlinck [this message]
2003-04-18 11:50 ` Stephen J. Turnbull
2003-04-18 14:17 ` Stefan Monnier
2003-04-19 8:18 ` Stephen J. Turnbull
2003-04-19 13:35 ` Richard Stallman
2003-04-19 4:14 ` Richard Stallman
2003-04-19 8:55 ` Stephen J. Turnbull
2003-04-21 0:59 ` Richard Stallman
2003-04-21 1:55 ` Luc Teirlinck
2003-04-21 10:58 ` Stephen J. Turnbull
2003-04-21 21:11 ` Luc Teirlinck
2003-04-21 23:43 ` Miles Bader
2003-04-22 3:26 ` Luc Teirlinck
2003-04-22 4:09 ` Jerry James
2003-04-22 8:15 ` Eli Zaretskii
2003-04-22 13:22 ` Stephen J. Turnbull
2003-04-22 14:38 ` Jerry James
2003-04-22 12:56 ` Luc Teirlinck
2003-04-22 14:56 ` Jerry James
2003-04-22 15:27 ` Luc Teirlinck
2003-04-22 13:19 ` Stephen J. Turnbull
2003-04-22 13:39 ` Miles Bader
2003-04-22 13:51 ` Luc Teirlinck
2003-04-22 16:26 ` Luc Teirlinck
2003-04-23 1:00 ` Richard Stallman
2003-04-23 4:09 ` Stephen J. Turnbull
2003-04-24 23:12 ` Richard Stallman
2003-05-20 1:55 ` Stephen J. Turnbull
2003-05-22 15:00 ` Kai Großjohann
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-05-20 3:11 Bill Wohler
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200304171932.h3HJWfS08739@eel.dms.auburn.edu \
--to=teirllm@dms.auburn.edu \
--cc=emacs-devel@gnu.org \
--cc=stephen@xemacs.org \
--cc=xemacs-design@xemacs.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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).