From: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org>
To: Stefan Kangas <stefankangas@gmail.com>
Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
Subject: Re: Make regexp handling more regular
Date: Thu, 03 Dec 2020 09:31:56 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87ft4nz3wj.fsf@gnus.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CADwFkmknD5CmysmQFaPFGiQpSk4H_N-9NgbhCW0vFweZkNhHAA@mail.gmail.com> (Stefan Kangas's message of "Wed, 2 Dec 2020 05:12:25 -0600")
Stefan Kangas <stefankangas@gmail.com> writes:
> I like the idea of adding an entirely new built-in API based on the
> current state of the art. I would begin such a project by looking into
> what other Lisps are doing, such as CL, Clojure, Guile and Racket. Why
> shouldn't Emacs Lisp be best-in-class?
Sure.
Common Lisp doesn't have regexps, but (some) implementations do, and
there's a bunch of libraries, like http://edicl.github.io/cl-ppcre/
I'm not much in favour:
* (scan "(a)*b" "xaaabd")
1
5
#(3)
#(4)
* (let ((s (create-scanner "(([a-c])+)x")))
(scan s "abcxy"))
0
4
#(0 2)
#(3 3)
And since it's Common Lisp, of course you have special forms for
destructing:
* (register-groups-bind (first second third fourth)
("((a)|(b)|(c))+" "abababc" :sharedp t)
(list first second third fourth))
("c" "a" "b" "c")
Guile: https://www.gnu.org/software/guile/manual/html_node/Regexp-Functions.html
(string-match "[0-9][0-9][0-9][0-9]" "blah2002")
⇒ #("blah2002" (4 . 8))
(map match:substring (list-matches "[a-z]+" "abc 42 def 78"))
⇒ ("abc" "def")
Clojure: https://purelyfunctional.tv/mini-guide/regexes-in-clojure/
(re-matches #"abc(.*)" "abcxyz")
["abcxyz" "xyz"]
I.e., if there's one match, we return the match substring, otherwise an
array. It's nice in one way, but the cleverness leads to errors when
(re-)writing code.
(subs (re-matches #"[a-z]+" "fooo baar") 3)
but then you add some more and you have to rewrite to something like:
(let [[_ s1 s2] (re-matches #"([a-z]+) ([a-z]+)" full-name)]
(subs s1 3))
I hate that.
The thing that makes looking at other languages here slightly less
useful is that Emacs has buffers. We're often not interested in the
(sub-)matches themselves at all, but instead their buffer positions
(i.e., match-beginning/end).
> As for naming, how about just using a short prefix such as "re-"?
> AFAICT, we currently have only five functions using that prefix.
Sure.
> Tangentially, I have always been wondering if its feasible to add a new
> regular expression type to `read' where you don't have to incessantly
> double quote all special characters. (One could take inspiration from
> Python, for example, which adds an "r" character to strings to turn them
> into regexps: r"regexp".)
I'm all for adding a regexp object type (and a new read syntax), but I
think it's a somewhat orthogonal? Not totally, though: I've long wished
for match/searching functions to be generic, and work differently on
strings and regexps. That is, if fed a string, then do comparison with
`string-equal' and when fed a regexp, do the comparison with
`string-match'.
So you could say
(search-forward "foo")
and
(search-forward #r"fo+")
or
(search-forward (re-make "fo+"))
-- no reason for there to be separate functions if we have regexp objects.
--
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-12-03 8:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-12-02 9:05 Make regexp handling more regular Lars Ingebrigtsen
2020-12-02 10:44 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2020-12-02 11:12 ` Stefan Kangas
2020-12-02 11:21 ` Philipp Stephani
2020-12-03 8:31 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen [this message]
2020-12-02 17:17 ` Stefan Monnier
2020-12-02 17:45 ` Yuan Fu
2020-12-02 19:24 ` Stefan Monnier
2020-12-03 8:40 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2020-12-03 8:38 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2020-12-03 15:10 ` Stefan Monnier
2020-12-03 16:58 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2020-12-03 17:40 ` Stefan Monnier
2020-12-02 21:19 ` Juri Linkov
2020-12-03 8:41 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2020-12-03 15:00 ` Stefan Monnier
2020-12-03 21:02 ` Juri Linkov
2020-12-03 22:20 ` Vasilij Schneidermann
2020-12-02 21:28 ` Daniel Martín
2020-12-03 4:16 ` Adam Porter
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=87ft4nz3wj.fsf@gnus.org \
--to=larsi@gnus.org \
--cc=emacs-devel@gnu.org \
--cc=stefankangas@gmail.com \
/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).