From: npostavs@users.sourceforge.net
To: Tino Calancha <tino.calancha@gmail.com>
Cc: 26338@debbugs.gnu.org, Marcin Borkowski <mbork@mbork.pl>,
Juri Linkov <juri@linkov.net>
Subject: bug#26338: 26.0.50; Collect all matches for REGEXP in current buffer
Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2017 09:11:30 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <874ly3vw1p.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1704052046350.28514@calancha-pc> (Tino Calancha's message of "Wed, 5 Apr 2017 20:58:51 +0900 (JST)")
Tino Calancha <tino.calancha@gmail.com> writes:
>
> So far people think that it's easy to write a while loop. I wonder if
> they think the same about the existence of `dolist': the should
> never use it and always write a `while' loop instead. Don't think they
> do that anyway.
Perhaps a macro that loops over matches?
(defmacro domatches (spec &rest body)
"Loop over matches to REGEXP.
\(fn (MATCH-VAR [GROUP] REGEXP [BOUND]) BODY...)")
Or an addition to cl-loop that would allow doing something like
(cl-loop for m being the matches of "foo\\|bar"
do ...)
Then you could easily 'collect m' to get the list of matches if you want
that.
> I will repeat it once more. I find nice, having an operator returning
> a list with matches for REGEXP.
I don't think that's come up for me very much, if at all. It seems
easier to just operate on the matches directly rather than collecting
and then mapping.
> If such operator, in addition,
> accepts a body of code or a function, then i find this operator very
> nice
> and elegant.
Forcing collection on the looping operator seems inelegant to me.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-04-05 13:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-04-02 12:41 bug#26338: 26.0.50; Collect all matches for REGEXP in current buffer Tino Calancha
2017-04-02 15:57 ` Dmitry Gutov
2017-04-03 3:58 ` Tino Calancha
2017-04-02 22:10 ` Juri Linkov
2017-04-03 4:01 ` Tino Calancha
2017-04-03 6:13 ` Tino Calancha
2017-04-03 23:35 ` Juri Linkov
2017-04-04 1:37 ` Tino Calancha
2017-04-04 2:20 ` Tino Calancha
2017-04-04 14:32 ` Marcin Borkowski
2017-04-05 11:58 ` Tino Calancha
2017-04-05 13:11 ` npostavs [this message]
2017-04-07 10:06 ` Tino Calancha
2017-04-07 14:40 ` Drew Adams
2017-04-08 4:45 ` Tino Calancha
2017-04-08 5:49 ` Drew Adams
2017-04-08 15:29 ` Tino Calancha
2017-04-08 15:42 ` Drew Adams
2017-04-08 11:46 ` Philipp Stephani
2017-04-08 13:42 ` Tino Calancha
2017-04-08 14:41 ` Philipp Stephani
2017-04-08 15:20 ` Tino Calancha
2017-04-22 19:42 ` Philipp Stephani
2017-04-08 15:38 ` npostavs
2017-04-22 19:36 ` Philipp Stephani
2017-04-05 22:03 ` Juri Linkov
2017-04-07 14:47 ` Tino Calancha
2017-04-07 15:28 ` Noam Postavsky
2017-04-07 15:54 ` Drew Adams
2017-04-08 13:49 ` Tino Calancha
2020-09-15 15:41 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=874ly3vw1p.fsf@users.sourceforge.net \
--to=npostavs@users.sourceforge.net \
--cc=26338@debbugs.gnu.org \
--cc=juri@linkov.net \
--cc=mbork@mbork.pl \
--cc=tino.calancha@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this external index
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs/org-mode.git
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.