From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Perry E. Metzger" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: modern regexes in emacs Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2019 20:46:52 -0500 Message-ID: <20190215204652.6ebc1615@jabberwock.cb.piermont.com> References: <20180616123704.7123f6d7@jabberwock.cb.piermont.com> <87po0qs6re.fsf@gmail.com> <83r2c9m8yj.fsf@gnu.org> <17581DA9-7DCA-432E-A2E8-E5184DFA8B4B@acm.org> <20190215114728.0785e891@jabberwock.cb.piermont.com> <20190215175405.GA5438@ACM> <43edeabe-7758-4c7e-b00c-fd16e3505ef7@default> <20190215183317.45d559a6@jabberwock.cb.piermont.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="262467"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" Cc: Mattias =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Engdeg=E5rd?= , lokedhs@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, Philippe Vaucher , Alan Mackenzie , Eli Zaretskii , Drew Adams To: Jay Kamat Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Feb 16 02:47:09 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1gup4L-00163k-Tq for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 16 Feb 2019 02:47:06 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49879 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gup4K-0004cr-Jy for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 15 Feb 2019 20:47:04 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:44903) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gup4E-0004ck-KV for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 15 Feb 2019 20:46:59 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gup4D-0003xO-WD for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 15 Feb 2019 20:46:58 -0500 Original-Received: from hacklheber.piermont.com ([166.84.7.14]:57236) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gup4C-0003vf-FG; Fri, 15 Feb 2019 20:46:56 -0500 Original-Received: from snark.cb.piermont.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hacklheber.piermont.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 445AB286; Fri, 15 Feb 2019 20:46:53 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from jabberwock.cb.piermont.com (jabberwock.cb.piermont.com [10.160.2.107]) by snark.cb.piermont.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21DF53C2001; Fri, 15 Feb 2019 20:46:53 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 166.84.7.14 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:233408 Archived-At: On Fri, 15 Feb 2019 16:34:57 -0800 Jay Kamat wrote: > On February 15, 2019 3:33:17 PM PST, "Perry E. Metzger" > wrote: > > >Look, the old syntax was replaced by the Unix people in the early > >1980s because it was garbage. Everyone uses the new syntax, and > >everyone is used to it. Sure, new doesn't always mean better, but > >in this case, yes, the newer regex syntax is a whole lot better, > >not to mention that it's what everyone on earth is used to. > > I started using Emacs less than 4 years ago (so I could probably > consider myself a 'modern user'), and I honestly find the new > syntax much more confusing. Other people get to pick what they want, too. Eli has proposed an entirely reasonable solution where you can pick the ancient syntax or the modern one. You can still use the old syntax, but people who want the syntax Perl and Ruby and Python and Awk and pretty much every other programming language uses can get it if they opt in. If you don't want to let other people get the option of using the modern syntax, that's not demanding the right to use the old one, which won't be taken from you, that's demanding the right to keep other people from using the reasonable modern syntax. I think that's unreasonable. Perry -- Perry E. Metzger perry@piermont.com