From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dmitry Gutov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Ugly regexps Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2021 16:25:58 +0200 Message-ID: <469cc46c-5e0e-cd98-dc62-67f29139d9a2@yandex.ru> References: <83pn0g6ajq.fsf@gnu.org> <83v9a8jj2x.fsf@gnu.org> <83mtvkjb6c.fsf@gnu.org> <96182b13-f921-6f91-0cdc-320f54ed16bf@yandex.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="3732"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, stefankangas@gmail.com, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Mar 04 15:27:45 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lHox6-0000pJ-Ca for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 04 Mar 2021 15:27:44 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:37510 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lHox5-0007vB-DF for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 04 Mar 2021 09:27:43 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:53744) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lHove-0006rA-Gu for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 04 Mar 2021 09:26:16 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-wm1-x334.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::334]:53175) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lHovZ-0005oF-Gg; Thu, 04 Mar 2021 09:26:13 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-wm1-x334.google.com with SMTP id n22so8215664wmc.2; Thu, 04 Mar 2021 06:26:05 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=d3rM1qZPTfdFjRs0w7MEbQ3cxWhvxpzN90upgobfwMY=; b=tjKqzyAz1qxhFjytBdua7qNKF7SwwqpjOAjwtT4JrOU34ySXqx+8dQ21gNFSPkaPQG k5hBKtgXze1NeKSLe8r+JRJnoj4U0ucacIsFc5hUISIZvSMU0RzmQ503hMzO48Pv3OGK 3R6qNeBF1o5hBSXqXdDvnZl+7zCcXk7wUSPOrDcCH5ODpgTL5NNTBL6Sfk4ChOy46QEC /imZIcPcCr4OYNlPTSo5nhQk+IdVtC7FDoz6eVeBwa8ibDvksORuC1wgKyx2/nghl5+q Kxv7ZOA5oLOvLLld5Tx8oaB52tELcCB4P+Rgrvx0q78xBPTVPH59vzhqNV9sjKv67BQE 3YPw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id :date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=d3rM1qZPTfdFjRs0w7MEbQ3cxWhvxpzN90upgobfwMY=; b=lSvy2Dq72oYEf10RUNKOhKKpyM+bGtQSXjvDt5Nn8bDx8kUgxLe5fdRA9HJWyyJFob 2mxVfRezkKNE7nAxjC1S4SNJFjcI04+WigXWswdkoHk8ShtF3bQI/ZsfHSrnQDGQFHyF Tl/WqdyPsQQHeuHceyTi/jc50oTcbqG0qN8M8DJ/wieN2xJ+EE/gg9CA6eNpp5D0Q0xg pX5B7Jv9YEcNh3YO5NID4rFoijYVsqXH4xRjgi9Z0K/Z2I6RPCwhPgkWCuGuDgJUdgF3 qDkcMXRZjFQ4b7OWIwFtWGNw5cHB3hrtUCli+M1b1BOtkDNYrxUTqS8k3tmHVPeBc2FU LDsQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532XXUNY1rlYVryw/6i1ukJZlsWjyOANRkSkne2pI8vvCMm+9vnh jrItjz2xQuAQz6d5uSDzkJj8zeWRfmk= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyOu8NoQZG5/dAlvWfefvdGNLxklOfV+Uy8wWwTmFkdG4CZJPI3jEwrtL1Ij+EcINRXQuRgrA== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:80c6:: with SMTP id b189mr4271947wmd.21.1614867962454; Thu, 04 Mar 2021 06:26:02 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from [192.168.0.6] ([46.251.119.176]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id 4sm10684954wma.0.2021.03.04.06.25.59 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 04 Mar 2021 06:26:00 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::334; envelope-from=raaahh@gmail.com; helo=mail-wm1-x334.google.com X-Spam_score_int: -14 X-Spam_score: -1.5 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.5 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.249, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:265956 Archived-At: On 04.03.2021 07:47, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> From: Dmitry Gutov >> Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2021 21:58:17 +0200 >> Content-Language: en-US >> Cc: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org >> >> On 03.03.2021 21:21, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >>> And ERE isn't? >> >> To be fair, extended regular expressions are the regular expressions >> flavor most commonly used in the contemporary world, recent/popular >> programming languages, etc. >> >> So for a lot of people this won't be +1 thing to learn. > > So we are now going to cater to users of other programs more than we > cater to Emacs users who are used to the Emacs RE syntaxes? How does > that make sense? Do other programs prefer the Emacs RE syntax to > their own? Not "more". Just make an extra (fairly small) effort to accommodate them. > We have rx for many years, and just recently enhanced it > significantly. I fail to see how it would make sense to introduce yet > another RE syntax into Emacs, with all the overhead that brings with > it. Maybe it could make sense as an ELPA add-on, but not in core. The 'ere' function would be helpful to have in the core either way. As already mentioned in this thread, I have been using an equivalent of it for 5 years now. > More generally, I wish we stopped investing so much of our time and > energy in cleanups and other support tasks, and more to add > significant new applications and editing features. That would make > more users happier, I think. Perhaps if contributors didn't have to fight you about every little thing they need to change or fix (or if you responded to arguments, at least), we'll get more features over time. This is especially discouraging when the disagreement is over a minor change in a package I supposedly maintain (bug#44611 is the most glaring example). I can't threaten to slam the door and leave every time this happens, but this kind of malarkey sucks out a significant amount of time and enthusiasm.