From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: pjb@informatimago.com (Pascal J. Bourguignon) Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: Perl, etc has these "?"-prefix modifiers/codes/whatever. Precisely which does emacs have (and NOT have)? Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2010 20:02:26 +0100 Organization: Informatimago Message-ID: <873a0ynz99.fsf@galatea.lan.informatimago.com> References: <877hqaojg9.fsf@galatea.lan.informatimago.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1266522063 14784 80.91.229.12 (18 Feb 2010 19:41:03 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2010 19:41:03 +0000 (UTC) To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Feb 18 20:40:59 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NiCF7-0000Lm-2Y for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 18 Feb 2010 20:40:57 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47525 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NiCF6-0005Eu-Fi for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 18 Feb 2010 14:40:56 -0500 Original-Path: news.stanford.edu!usenet.stanford.edu!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail Original-Newsgroups: gnu.emacs.help Original-Lines: 51 Original-X-Trace: individual.net Qug1olSrejtSJNhrbua7JQQ9qYkqIPryJC72EKXP3zSu/Snu/D Cancel-Lock: sha1:NzhkMzA0YzBkY2U2NmU2ZmI5YWI0Mjk5NWI0YzQ1N2YyODRjN2NkMg== sha1:FOaZJUwR5Awfotz4ubNRMPpY8Z0= Face: iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAADAAAAAwAQMAAABtzGvEAAAABlBMVEUAAAD///+l2Z/dAAAA oElEQVR4nK3OsRHCMAwF0O8YQufUNIQRGIAja9CxSA55AxZgFO4coMgYrEDDQZWPIlNAjwq9 033pbOBPtbXuB6PKNBn5gZkhGa86Z4x2wE67O+06WxGD/HCOGR0deY3f9Ijwwt7rNGNf6Oac l/GuZTF1wFGKiYYHKSFAkjIo1b6sCYS1sVmFhhhahKQssRjRT90ITWUk6vvK3RsPGs+M1RuR mV+hO/VvFAAAAABJRU5ErkJggg== X-Accept-Language: fr, es, en X-Disabled: X-No-Archive: no User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (darwin) Original-Xref: news.stanford.edu gnu.emacs.help:176864 X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:71932 Archived-At: John Withers writes: > On Thu, 2010-02-18 at 12:46 +0100, Pascal J. Bourguignon wrote: >> dkcombs@panix.com (David Combs) writes: >> >> > Subj: Perl, etc has these "?"-prefix modifiers/codes/whatever. >> > Precisely which does emacs have (and NOT have)? >> > >> > >> > Please, someone, make an ascii or html table or even plain text >> > list of all these neat "new" non-standard ops that perl and >> > even php and ruby etc seem to have now, comparing them >> > to what Emacs has or don't have. >> >> emacs lisp has a lot of data types. But in lisp, the types are not >> associated to the variables, but to the values. Therefore names >> (symbols are used to name things in general in lisp) don't need to be >> marked in any special way. > > No, what he wants is for someone to go through and make a list of all > the perl lookahead/behind assertions for regular expressions, even > though the data is very easily found with a single google search and > comes down to pretty much if it has a (? then emacs doesn't have > it, because the regexes in emacs haven't been touched since the > neolithic. > > And finally he is looking for a code patch or pointers to where to look > for something like this patch you can find with a simple google search: > http://emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com/cgi/bugreport.cgi?msg=1;bug=5393 > > And while I am more than happy to take digs at the lack of basic google > searches and lazyweb requests, I do get the sentiment. At this point the > entire rest of the world has moved on to perl-style regular expressions > a good decade ago, and unlike many things about the world moving in a > different direction than emacs, in this case they have more > functionality. Lookahead and lookbehind assertions are useful. Ah, I thought he meant the $x @x #x whatever... In the case of "regular expressions", when you add certain extensions, they're not regular expressions at all, so, I will just cite Jamie Zawinski: Some people, when confronted with a problem, think "I know, I'll use regular expressions." Now they have two problems. -- __Pascal Bourguignon__