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: Lookarounds and recursion in Emacs regexes Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2023 12:46:12 +0300 Message-ID: References: <87h6wbeti3.fsf@mbork.pl> <877cx7n5an.fsf@dataswamp.org> <878rhelfks.fsf@dataswamp.org> <87mt5tje44.fsf@dataswamp.org> 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="6540"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Mutt/2.2.9+54 (af2080d) (2022-11-21) To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Feb 07 10:48:42 2023 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 1pPKab-0001Mb-Ut for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 07 Feb 2023 10:48:37 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pPKaJ-0003FA-EG; Tue, 07 Feb 2023 04:48:19 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pPKa8-0003EC-Ip for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Feb 2023 04:48:17 -0500 Original-Received: from stw1.rcdrun.com ([217.170.207.13]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pPKa5-0007SQ-JN for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Feb 2023 04:48:08 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost ([::ffff:102.87.18.138]) (AUTH: PLAIN admin, TLS: TLS1.3,256bits,ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) by stw1.rcdrun.com with ESMTPSA id 0000000000103A97.0000000063E21E37.00005517; Tue, 07 Feb 2023 02:47:35 -0700 Mail-Followup-To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87mt5tje44.fsf@dataswamp.org> 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: 2.1.29 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-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.help:142629 Archived-At: * Emanuel Berg [2023-02-05 16:15]: > Jean Louis wrote: > > >>> Although somewhat proficient, I never learnt to love Python. > >> > >> People don't love Python like they do Lisp, but no doubt it > >> has it's good sides - development speed not the least. > > > > Do you want to say that development speed in Lisp is slower > > than in Python? > > Lisp is a family of languages, if we talk Elisp then Elisp is > faster for anything Emacs related obviously, if we talk > everything else then Python is faster. Faster for development? Faster for speed processing by programming language? Subject is development, not speed. I do not know if it exists for Python, but for Emacs Lisp, all references exists within Emacs. That helps for speed of development. I cannot know for Python how can I see definition of the function, is there any way to see that? > If we talk Common Lisp vs Python, then Python is, in > general, faster. For Common Lisp I can access all functions and their definitions from within the Common Lisp itself. Great design! For Python, I see that many things are not integrated in Emacs, and getting symbol descriptions, functions, information, it is not easy, and is error prone. I installed `jedi' package, but I see I get not conclusive error messages and I cannot get information for Python functions. User is disabled by design. That Python development would be faster, I can't say for Emacs editor. Regarding language itself, maybe you could tell "why" do you consider development with Python faster? > We then consider the languages themselves, the technology around, > but also the huge spread of Python while Lisp is either a fringe > language or - actually that's our common ground - the underground. You have not explained specifics. I cannot get you. I get opinion, but not specific. I gave you one specific on developing Emacs Lisp in Emacs, versus developing Python, which function descriptions are not easily accessible. Developing Emacs Lisp in Vim would become harder for that reason. Editor is one important aspect of it. "Huge spread" of Python is indication of something, I do not know what you mean with it. Maybe you mean that number of people knowing Python would be helpful in development? I can understand it from there. If language is "fringe", I cannot see how that influences development, apart from maybe not having other people to exchange with them. For example, I could easily program in this programming language, much "fringe", and I could find all references, books, just anything: Icon (programming language) - Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icon_(programming_language) What are Icon's distinguishing characteristics: https://www2.cs.arizona.edu/icon/uguide/faq.htm#features I just guess I would have no problems with that one and speedy development, it is for reason of being well documented. -- Jean Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns: https://www.fsf.org/campaigns In support of Richard M. Stallman https://stallmansupport.org/