From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Drew Adams Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: modern regexes in emacs Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2019 10:27:44 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <43edeabe-7758-4c7e-b00c-fd16e3505ef7@default> 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> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="192572"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" Cc: =?iso-8859-1?B?TWF0dGlhcyBFbmdkZWflcmQ=?= , lokedhs@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, Philippe Vaucher , jaygkamat@gmail.com, Eli Zaretskii To: Alan Mackenzie , "Perry E. Metzger" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Feb 15 19:28:19 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 1guiDh-000ny0-RN for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 15 Feb 2019 19:28:17 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44453 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1guiDg-0000NX-Nr for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 15 Feb 2019 13:28:16 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:51966) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1guiDb-0000NK-9P for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 15 Feb 2019 13:28:12 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1guiDa-0007mS-HC for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 15 Feb 2019 13:28:11 -0500 Original-Received: from userp2120.oracle.com ([156.151.31.85]:32912) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1guiDY-0007G8-Tm; Fri, 15 Feb 2019 13:28:09 -0500 Original-Received: from pps.filterd (userp2120.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by userp2120.oracle.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x1FIJJ3d145031; Fri, 15 Feb 2019 18:27:54 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=oracle.com; h=mime-version : message-id : date : from : sender : to : cc : subject : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=corp-2018-07-02; bh=X5Aj7q3S3eLwtPudF26H3An6wjHKhtOGJKLO2MLQsks=; b=h2kE1prLRUBc1UhN7Ym0sAQW3GpUUuaLpddOuIqSclQm+0gumno7fHjYnolbqiTnh8hg 8YYOfn0exqZtZmClj82hT9t0NkuCIic4pBfaQ2zuo9gxeXTTDfzqYl3gwzYzbMUZMFyx 8mxOVzkLTcc4QqVnTkUaPbmCde6yTASL+UrTb2T5CoXebnT8BR4glW+K6qsn36FrDAEQ /QGJBJImDyojIDlnORnq/740fbElFBD1vthOkfW/U8nMLp8dU4c8W+AKJ01++IxUHpo+ RUEmlJkX/9RCJd+A5tF5MJRmNzKPBJYutMjd/9Baqp9jJsYiOiQTcy5kwPcLOlg+kTIY Og== Original-Received: from aserv0021.oracle.com (aserv0021.oracle.com [141.146.126.233]) by userp2120.oracle.com with ESMTP id 2qhreefecy-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 15 Feb 2019 18:27:54 +0000 Original-Received: from userv0122.oracle.com (userv0122.oracle.com [156.151.31.75]) by aserv0021.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id x1FIRmK4013880 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 15 Feb 2019 18:27:48 GMT Original-Received: from abhmp0004.oracle.com (abhmp0004.oracle.com [141.146.116.10]) by userv0122.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id x1FIRktG027614; Fri, 15 Feb 2019 18:27:47 GMT In-Reply-To: <20190215175405.GA5438@ACM> X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.9.1 (1003210) [OL 16.0.4810.0 (x86)] X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=5900 definitions=9168 signatures=668683 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1011 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1810050000 definitions=main-1902150124 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 156.151.31.85 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:233387 Archived-At: > > Modern syntax is the main one. >=20 > Such use of "modern" always gets on my nerves. "Modern" is not the same > as "good", and likely has a very weak correlation with it. Not to mention that "modern" has been applied to the latest fashion, epheme= ral or not, for at least 100 years. Today's modernista is tomorrow morning= 's has-been, but s?he sometimes continues to tout the same old-fashioned mo= dernisms. There's absolutely nothing new about labeling something "modern" (or "old-f= ashioned", for that matter). Nothing new about "modern". > Why aren't we all using "modern" editors, for example? Why indeed? Headline: "Users of Anachronistic Editor Emacs Go 'Modern'!" > > I think we should make it possible to slowly switch over to the syntax > > everyone using regexps has gotten used to over the last 30 years or so. > > BREs in the style Emacs has been using have been obsolete for longer > > than many Emacs users have been alive. >=20 > They're not obsolete: they're used in grep, sed, and in Emacs. >=20 > There are several different standards for writing regexps, all of > approximately the same age. None is better than any other (aside from > extra facilities available in some versions). But surely some are "modern" and others are "obsolete", Alan. ;-) (What's the equivalent of L'Academie Francaise for things technical?) Emacs itself has been obsolete for longer than many Emacs users have been a= live. Emacs is dead. Long live Emacs. > This seems to me to be the same argument as that proposing that Emacs > should change its key bindings to match those of other programs, because > "everybody" knows those other bindings. Emacs key bindings have been obsolete longer than many Emacs users have bee= n alive. Please remember this.