From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: =?utf-8?Q?Mattias_Engdeg=C3=A5rd?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: :alnum: broken? Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 18:57:50 +0100 Message-ID: References: <86wo8flqct.fsf@stephe-leake.org> <86sgj3ljf0.fsf@stephe-leake.org> <5fecc0e1-1ee2-5a89-9297-b0b9aa4a8e9c@cs.ucla.edu> <03A37C4B-9FE8-4A25-9851-79BC8265455E@acm.org> <142e845d-eba3-5975-fa63-4c1b14ed4600@cs.ucla.edu> <3A14F30E-60EF-4C99-AC1A-9A1B2539169B@acm.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\)) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="126546"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: =?utf-8?Q?Cl=C3=A9ment_Pit-Claudel?= , Paul Eggert , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Feb 27 18:58:50 2020 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 1j7NQw-000Woi-NQ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 27 Feb 2020 18:58:50 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:35832 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1j7NQv-0002oS-QW for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 27 Feb 2020 12:58:49 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:57437) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1j7NQJ-0002GC-Eo for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 27 Feb 2020 12:58:12 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1j7NQI-0007Bz-A9 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 27 Feb 2020 12:58:11 -0500 Original-Received: from mail85c50.megamailservers.eu ([91.136.10.95]:48898 helo=mail18c50.megamailservers.eu) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1j7NQH-00078f-Nf; Thu, 27 Feb 2020 12:58:10 -0500 X-Authenticated-User: mattiase@bredband.net DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=megamailservers.eu; s=maildub; t=1582826274; bh=khTdHdSEFaVwZpicFBSiSdSB594PK/Opxc/zn0pVmq8=; h=Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To:From; b=dFmpkbM1v3zihvXaco3lZsWarULX90UEbEQtvMnKc94tGbThrfwVp8TfKq3joKh9m CkLhdmCoeR7vriR1NhxhITJvCO2au9tQm/8MIcbBnHchmkxuEBrVwwVK96dlrGPv3/ rp6V/9Mzxyad7OkLGG+Z+ir2dpWOLSplKEqm15So= Feedback-ID: mattiase@acm.or Original-Received: from [192.168.0.4] (c188-150-171-71.bredband.comhem.se [188.150.171.71]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail18c50.megamailservers.eu (8.14.9/8.13.1) with ESMTP id 01RHvo7x031739; Thu, 27 Feb 2020 17:57:52 +0000 In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11) X-CTCH-RefID: str=0001.0A782F15.5E580320.0085, ss=1, re=0.000, recu=0.000, reip=0.000, cl=1, cld=1, fgs=0 X-CTCH-VOD: Unknown X-CTCH-Spam: Unknown X-CTCH-Score: 0.000 X-CTCH-Flags: 0 X-CTCH-ScoreCust: 0.000 X-CSC: 0 X-CHA: v=2.3 cv=dfr+Ikfe c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=SF+I6pRkHZhrawxbOkkvaA==:117 a=SF+I6pRkHZhrawxbOkkvaA==:17 a=jpOVt7BSZ2e4Z31A5e1TngXxSK0=:19 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=M51BFTxLslgA:10 a=mDV3o1hIAAAA:8 a=0UFc9G6SOFY0Hcq5nO4A:9 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 a=_FVE-zBwftR9WsbkzFJk:22 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x (no timestamps) [generic] X-Received-From: 91.136.10.95 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:245089 Archived-At: 26 feb. 2020 kl. 23.38 skrev Eli Zaretskii : > Please revert these changes. I already said that I wasn't interested = in making these regular expressions signal an error. Sorry Eli, I didn't realise it was a belief strongly held. The changes = have been reverted, of course. But perhaps you will let me attempt to sway your opinion? I was a bit = lukewarm to the idea myself, but the irony was not lost on me after = making this very mistake in the implementation of code designed to find = regexp errors. In short, the check saves time for beginners and = experienced users alike, with no downside worth speaking about at all. There is no way a byte-compiler warning could come close to the = precision of a run-time check, and I speak with some modest experience = on the subject. A compiler warning wouldn't have found my error, nor = would it find common non-code use such as interactive search. Initially I was worried about someone's regexp-composing code falling = victim of a more stringent check, but Paul convinced me that this is = unlikely to be an actual concern. Besides, we do break absolute = compatibility now and then for good reasons, and this is one. There is = also GNU grep as a precedence.