From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Kangas Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: "Raw" string literals for elisp Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2021 17:54:18 +0200 Message-ID: References: <4209edd83cfee7c84b2d75ebfcd38784fa21b23c.camel@crossproduct.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="23068"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Stefan Monnier , Emacs developers To: Anna Glasgall Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Sep 08 17:59:25 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 1mNzyu-0005nm-IH for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 08 Sep 2021 17:59:24 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:60868 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mNzyt-0006fb-AI for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 08 Sep 2021 11:59:23 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:38658) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mNzuE-0000Bx-2s for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 08 Sep 2021 11:54:34 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-pg1-f174.google.com ([209.85.215.174]:39891) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mNzuC-0002eK-7m for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 08 Sep 2021 11:54:33 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-pg1-f174.google.com with SMTP id g184so3068219pgc.6 for ; Wed, 08 Sep 2021 08:54:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=q5DJeTnit0Fq8VwnQaBadSV4GWq27YkTogNt2clqJFg=; b=UC5rM/BT9QkoHZNK1ydSlE98pUcul/G/wAnk8c8ciIEmh8YmJ24voEi40U/wo2SRx1 SrNwzdfbWh65NChLYMDorwVkEGfAe17Xac+l0usIb85ZiEBfsS9AjXzhpIwBbIpmF5Uc LvB/iLDILJfFxtvFmQkgBF4utwaK7mx/8aRXgsd+IyV+hvXkdu7B8Al9lIztwRwitMAy Cqa8pUQ8vlGEHmmj62JNejKaw69cyatyl6WsxRnfFYBadIJ9zlUtqLoosnIuUmKSHtcB W1aWlxHIG1tBCAtxUplpf7VEp9xzlVC2vr+iriWvBZdyKWmGwe/EV8OLGillkx4oxzcq 3kag== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532e+iTfqNJQuHkBoSfVahZHP+RtJy3CnEQPtthmalCSKdrVAgXm PVTc4YEqKOq3HGWnYyNQ5mOqEp51LvikovZgeeY= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxzOPmTqG52jmokbXDI31R0noWhBLyjuHSgb+chInfrY6Pw2dgejGxk5ubsiMn/JsDKkFoCW6GYVe9HCVn+f6A= X-Received: by 2002:a62:ea06:0:b0:3e1:62a6:95b8 with SMTP id t6-20020a62ea06000000b003e162a695b8mr4475901pfh.70.1631116469913; Wed, 08 Sep 2021 08:54:29 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.215.174; envelope-from=stefankangas@gmail.com; helo=mail-pg1-f174.google.com X-Spam_score_int: -13 X-Spam_score: -1.4 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.4 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.249, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, 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:274362 Archived-At: Anna Glasgall writes: > During the course of working on this, I came across the following in I > think syntax.el: > > > (while (re-search-forward > "\\(\\\\\\\\\\)\\(?:\\(\\\\\\\\\\)\\|\\((\\(?:\\?[0- > 9]*:\\)?\\|[|)]\\)\\)" bound t) > > which I feel by itself rather justifies this work. I didn't study your patch, but I for one hope that this feature will eventually get accepted. IMHO, it would reduce a not insignificant pain point for (some types of) programming in Emacs Lisp. The argument against having "raw" strings in ELisp, if I understand, it is that it will make some code in core more complex. This is true, but it will at the same time make even more code out there less complex, or at least easier to read and understand. Once it is fully implemented, there will of course be bugs, but over time the feature will stabilize. In the long run I think we will win more by making Emacs Lisp more attractive (or at least less unpleasant) to a generation that have already been spoiled by using raw strings in other languages.