From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Jean Louis Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: For text processing, which is more powerful, emacs or perl? Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 08:23:10 +0300 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="26444"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Mutt/2.0 (3d08634) (2020-11-07) Cc: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Dec 20 06:28:01 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@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 1kqrGD-0006kL-1i for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 20 Dec 2020 06:28:01 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:46924 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kqrGC-0003nc-3m for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 20 Dec 2020 00:28:00 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:39218) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kqrFK-0003nG-Ge for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 20 Dec 2020 00:27:06 -0500 Original-Received: from stw1.rcdrun.com ([217.170.207.13]:45231) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kqrFE-0003MW-OF for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 20 Dec 2020 00:27:02 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost ([::ffff:41.202.241.37]) (AUTH: PLAIN securesender, TLS: TLS1.2,256bits,ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) by stw1.rcdrun.com with ESMTPSA id 000000000001E53C.000000005FDEE0A1.0000797D; Sat, 19 Dec 2020 22:26:57 -0700 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Received-SPF: pass client-ip=217.170.207.13; envelope-from=bugs@gnu.support; helo=stw1.rcdrun.com X-Spam_score_int: 1 X-Spam_score: 0.1 X-Spam_bar: / X-Spam_report: (0.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URI_DOTEDU=1.999 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "help-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.help:126613 Archived-At: * Stefan Monnier [2020-12-19 19:02]: > > It's well known that perl's regexp is very powerful for its capability > > of text processing. So, which is more powerful, emacs or perl, in this > > scenario? > > Probably Snobol or Icon. Thank you. Very interesting resource: https://www2.cs.arizona.edu/icon/