From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Alan Mackenzie Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: "Raw" string literals for elisp Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2021 19:00:55 +0000 Message-ID: References: <4209edd83cfee7c84b2d75ebfcd38784fa21b23c.camel@crossproduct.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="366"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Emacs developers , Anna Glasgall , Stefan Monnier To: Mattias =?iso-8859-1?Q?Engdeg=E5rd?= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Sep 08 21:02:46 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 1mO2qM-000ARd-Je for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 08 Sep 2021 21:02:46 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:57038 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mO2qI-0006jD-1g for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 08 Sep 2021 15:02:44 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:51634) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mO2og-0004d5-77 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 08 Sep 2021 15:01:02 -0400 Original-Received: from colin.muc.de ([193.149.48.1]:59141 helo=mail.muc.de) by eggs.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mO2oe-000609-5v for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 08 Sep 2021 15:01:01 -0400 Original-Received: (qmail 42175 invoked by uid 3782); 8 Sep 2021 19:00:56 -0000 Original-Received: from acm.muc.de (p4fe15ce6.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [79.225.92.230]) (using STARTTLS) by colin.muc.de (tmda-ofmipd) with ESMTP; Wed, 08 Sep 2021 21:00:56 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 4093 invoked by uid 1000); 8 Sep 2021 19:00:55 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Submission-Agent: TMDA/1.3.x (Ph3nix) X-Primary-Address: acm@muc.de Received-SPF: pass client-ip=193.149.48.1; envelope-from=acm@muc.de; helo=mail.muc.de X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.9 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham 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:274383 Archived-At: Hello, Mattias. On Wed, Sep 08, 2021 at 20:24:34 +0200, Mattias Engdegård wrote: > 8 sep. 2021 kl. 18.01 skrev Alan Mackenzie : > > It is more readable in the same way Cobol was very readable > That comparison is absurdly wrong Oh no it's not. > Rx is actually not verbose ..... The example you gave showed a single line string regexp being equivalent to a six line rx expression. That's a factor of 6. That's verbose by any measure. > I do suggest you give it an honest try in a project where you are > permitted to do so. rx has been in Emacs, I think, since 21.1. That was around 20 years ago. It hasn't caught on, to any great extent. If it were that good, it would have caught on. > You will be better informed, better equipped to read other people's > code, and may come to like it. Even if you don't, you may have > something interesting to report from the attempt. There are lots of ways of broadening my horizons, even within the scope of Emacs, but there are only so many hours in a day. > And I'll be there to answer questions! OK, here's one: why do think rx is so little used, compared with the string representation of regular expressions? -- Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).