From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: :alnum: broken? Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2020 22:38:19 +0200 Message-ID: <834kvafnwk.fsf@gnu.org> References: <86wo8flqct.fsf@stephe-leake.org> <86sgj3ljf0.fsf@stephe-leake.org> <5fecc0e1-1ee2-5a89-9297-b0b9aa4a8e9c@cs.ucla.edu> <03A37C4B-9FE8-4A25-9851-79BC8265455E@acm.org> <142e845d-eba3-5975-fa63-4c1b14ed4600@cs.ucla.edu> <3A14F30E-60EF-4C99-AC1A-9A1B2539169B@acm.org> <837e07gmka.fsf@gnu.org> <1c654ac9-10a2-4e5d-f77c-3b78bb580ffc@cs.ucla.edu> <83v9nqg8la.fsf@gnu.org> <298a093f-6eed-3a9f-99cf-bd17b9cb61f0@cs.ucla.edu> <83blpifp95.fsf@gnu.org> <81bfdae0-9fe1-f173-adb1-b5fe2ba2b808@cs.ucla.edu> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="16568"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: mattiase@acm.org, cpitclaudel@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Paul Eggert Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Feb 28 21:39:02 2020 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 1j7mPW-0004Dz-14 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 28 Feb 2020 21:39:02 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:53618 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1j7mPV-0000Bh-2F for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 28 Feb 2020 15:39:01 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:53884) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1j7mP3-0008BA-Mz for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Feb 2020 15:38:34 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:47389) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1j7mP3-0004ac-Dm; Fri, 28 Feb 2020 15:38:33 -0500 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=4183 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1j7mP2-0000PZ-HI; Fri, 28 Feb 2020 15:38:33 -0500 In-reply-to: <81bfdae0-9fe1-f173-adb1-b5fe2ba2b808@cs.ucla.edu> (message from Paul Eggert on Fri, 28 Feb 2020 12:25:56 -0800) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] 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:245112 Archived-At: > From: Paul Eggert > Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2020 12:25:56 -0800 > Cc: mattiase@acm.org, cpitclaudel@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org > > On 2/28/20 12:09 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > The regexp specification is not an Emacs-only feature, and I don't > > think we should invent a variant of regexp spec where these particular > > regexps are disallowed. > > It would not be an invention of Emacs. It is a variant used in Gnu grep > (and GNU grep surely does more regexp processing than Emacs does, if we > look at all the world's computation), and it works fine there. So even > if we took a strict stance against invention in Emacs regexps (a stance > that we haven't taken in the past), that stance would not preclude the > proposed change. > > > the particular reason for which you propose this change sounds > > backwards to me. > > The goal of this change is to improve the reliability of Elisp code, by > having Emacs reject invariably-incorrect regexps. It's not "backwards" > to improve reliability. I suggest that we agree to disagree on this. A couple of solutions was proposed that could be regarded as compromises, and allow us to flag these suspicious regexps in at least some of the use cases. I'm okay with those proposals, but not with the radical one you described.