From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: prettify-symbols-mode to handle "\alpha-\beta" ... Date: Fri, 05 Feb 2021 16:57:34 -0500 Message-ID: References: <87v9b8mvpb.fsf@telefonica.net> <87r1lwmrgc.fsf@telefonica.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="26139"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: =?windows-1252?Q?=D3scar?= Fuentes , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Christopher Dimech Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Feb 05 22:58:24 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 1l897P-0006fk-6W for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 05 Feb 2021 22:58:23 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:43190 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l897O-0003BU-6I for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 05 Feb 2021 16:58:22 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:47744) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l896j-0002RA-Dl for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 05 Feb 2021 16:57:41 -0500 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:52234) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l896h-0000Ne-2C for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 05 Feb 2021 16:57:40 -0500 Original-Received: from pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id D6851440A2B; Fri, 5 Feb 2021 16:57:37 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 1A1824409FE; Fri, 5 Feb 2021 16:57:36 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1612562256; bh=XhGD0lqkLi3fEzo+T4S3FVDWg8hfe5RTkm4lWBACF40=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=jKqfoyq6ZblTf7emROO0uiPHeqGjzVz+SeymQ+aKHYUeDx1MUPLIjCdRIEXWQEkCB 5NwZZHURu5/BGO1F1gTvmadNw1WkocMndiHT7fjn1XUf/2VmeD2lUz+d/SD78Sadkb oN8yTeKLSEMKjjFvoTP1JjrAzWoogRdpXalQ3mOY9fteXLNJoy2NNHXTCDMy+7yU5J /IeCMaOR/W4CtCqGZgvxHRwIJdGHFaPPn+RsuFVcK48WOaOajjjpNG6xp6Y8l/feO3 5aotlTksAWPx50gPW/g7bjZg+OcvUbeIBBnuhzIw/jlYNTuMct5RxWl6UZv0xni9fB aKQfwPlt/MKLA== Original-Received: from alfajor (76-10-182-85.dsl.teksavvy.com [76.10.182.85]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A175012023F; Fri, 5 Feb 2021 16:57:35 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: (Christopher Dimech's message of "Fri, 5 Feb 2021 22:05:36 +0100") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-Spam_score_int: -42 X-Spam_score: -4.3 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, 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:264019 Archived-At: >> > Would allowing a regexp solve the expression \alpha-\beta, >> > \alpha+\beta, \alpha/\beta, so that \alpha and \beta are >> > prettified seperately? >> I don't see how a regexp would help in those cases. > We could somehow employ 'split-string', which will target hyphens (or > whatever regexp of separators) and split every occurence of a composite > as two separate strings which can then be checked separately for > equality against alist. It seems more complex and less efficient than the current solution (which uses the non-regexp alist directly and then checks the context using the predicate function to see if it's a valid occurrence). I've been tempted to add support for regexps many times, but so far I haven't found a use case for them ;-) I suspect that they'll only make sense when we try to move further than just "replace occurrences of this identifier with that character". Stefan