From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Michael Heerdegen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#58727: 29.0.50; rx doc: Semantics of RX... Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2022 04:34:09 +0200 Message-ID: <87pmeic5lq.fsf@web.de> References: <3BB74199-7826-41F5-96BA-39CB3EC0E2B7@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="31509"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Cc: 58727@debbugs.gnu.org To: Mattias =?UTF-8?Q?Engdeg=C3=A5rd?= Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Oct 24 05:58:33 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-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 1omobh-00086Q-Cu for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 24 Oct 2022 05:58:33 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1omneu-0005rR-Fe; Sun, 23 Oct 2022 22:57:48 -0400 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 1omnIu-00058f-6d for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 23 Oct 2022 22:35:04 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1omnIs-0005xw-I5 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 23 Oct 2022 22:35:03 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1omnIs-0006CE-2i for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 23 Oct 2022 22:35:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Michael Heerdegen Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2022 02:35:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 58727 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 58727-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B58727.166657886223763 (code B ref 58727); Mon, 24 Oct 2022 02:35:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 58727) by debbugs.gnu.org; 24 Oct 2022 02:34:22 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:46729 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1omnIE-0006BD-4s for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 23 Oct 2022 22:34:22 -0400 Original-Received: from mout.web.de ([217.72.192.78]:47253) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1omnI9-0006Av-Qi for 58727@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 23 Oct 2022 22:34:20 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=web.de; s=s29768273; t=1666578850; bh=fjxvmatIze/EkgagLASSmXvT3DN9Rebh8XGhHH+RlV0=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=diTFoa0ub70Z4xTTT2llGrTliKao3352xTdNmN6PcGt6+l6TMi2lhwbLuKMsHbpdN rFW0tQXIseWn9A3C4p4+BJD5StN1NGMqP4FepoY3q4QQTyjtHfQuKVZM1j+/rBk8Wi V/YxUOkrTwhLNQR7WjWZrZa3c+XMkeo+m/mFelUtyMHAXmpuSSy5ZtAVbRtWiZN37x YGOZl0kFoyJwqI6a6vp7mknNX2hF3ihk3FWGs8fpfFk8NRXiplmUG4PxB6P5BehxRc 3qeqFQfr4IPFabMJCoQtZp/VDo9U5h8Hl55m/DTQfDzhBA/7ImvnoVfmiCVIYFm3i9 vQguapKAZ5shw== X-UI-Sender-Class: 814a7b36-bfc1-4dae-8640-3722d8ec6cd6 Original-Received: from drachen.dragon ([188.105.185.54]) by smtp.web.de (mrweb106 [213.165.67.124]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1MxpmW-1p1Pw43AeU-00zXsT; Mon, 24 Oct 2022 04:34:10 +0200 In-Reply-To: <3BB74199-7826-41F5-96BA-39CB3EC0E2B7@gmail.com> ("Mattias =?UTF-8?Q?Engdeg=C3=A5rd?="'s message of "Sun, 23 Oct 2022 18:14:10 +0200") X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:OimV/yxgarzypBAoyUOiQ2uvcVYBkDu2PMLMexaTzt4u5YYEbaF Iom6Y1L4jkah30ZUdiXeO6svbv9xIGR0murcORC9zeRSSZeHyy1NfUC1KxlTGAE1q5MPq9N KOKhZ0DEF0D7WRorYD1ean2Twp8XWIIEChX/dUezHdxi7cie2b+k5BMLGb3SXKjVXthYEVV iYiqAQPfmyXmt/fV+XvuA== UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:7amWzK/y+rg=;+s6uu9uxSgQdzDHz1fIdSLYow9Q EGcbXXO3oEHr0R6GyMIZ0HIPlHEg5FA0HYQ6m9+P7UemR+WGqUb8Cmq3WyCRRw3Dpj9eB3FUc V4O4PbKcQEZlWP+KHxi2o+snZPKLeY9csKJP4zmQGlpYoEmkD+CyiciMtCU2NU9+b1JLCj+LD hrbZ41/8Sc+xggzAD/vbeuaXdtaYUqq/cKn00j1Jk5GIioDfg+aZHhQn3KMpFiS0aaoFH1zhr EaIM6sy/bU0p2oqLOV6DficJx4RRih564PEGKvYwKC3eGvYVkM6gQ5mNokZ9xxT2Jfn/YsXGZ MrAg6ejIzTeQ19trTNW1039Tzvoc1+BY8e6/UKT5CoCjsjwZrCgAT6LayAaTSK6lrNn+iyKe6 iyYGfLtJg0ntkuUenleEiesh/1SdQwtIWyuguiuU6mZjxoFyyffAR+HrUA//ML0+3cwZnXfSx ZEmB93jiA+7cLHVnNou6F2W5iqxw6vpR8+2aFtLbHsHh7CqS3zctOS4enu/yxVwrbxUPYxQAL LO2gQXuFXoRRVnMcVDtBOS4E5kqTE26A/EW5Jg9QHca81iBklFO3hkc93ureAXKByskgzc2SE Gx0/apNGzGAkDGqgKvB/zd10YGkJpBa21hJSPZTf/BkcR5jJMLGKoZUhxEeyqVHngGDgC2zxY r9PuL7fVo77LoEjOvbrwfBquQOA8fW+TikJqRH6OCHsWp+Tm5DZDmxK++gxF2rTSzKZpFZ8KG jjvmkLNcxpi96vc66ivh0pFLTd2y6279iZ016mp1jw9UO7D+wlI+gGZRwvu0HYQVyI7acIKk X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:246071 Archived-At: Mattias Engdeg=C3=A5rd writes: > > The resulting regexps are concatenating like with an implicit `seq'. > > This is not trivial, though: in stringish regexps the repetition > > operators are only unary, and different interpretations would make sense > > for `rx' (implicit `seq', implicit `or'). > > The rule is implicit concatenation unless specified otherwise; maybe > we could say that in the leading paragraph. (`or` is the only place > where concatenation isn't done.) Yes, that would be good. > > Oh, and maybe let's also make more clear that `rx' always cares > > about implicit grouping when necessary. > > No, there is no such thing in rx. I think you misunderstood what I meant, I meant the implicit shy grouping added in the return value, as in (rx (or "ab" "cd")) =3D=3D> "\\(?:ab\\|cd\\)" ^^^^^ ^^^ > The manual provides corresponding string-notation constructs for > orientation only. This is important -- rx forms are defined by their > semantics, not by what strings they translate to. Is this trivial however? Is it clear that, even for people that see rx more as a translator to stringish regexps, `rx' is that smart? A sentence like "rx forms are defined by their semantics" would help to make that clear I think. Dunno, I'm just guessing that here is a potential for misunderstanding. Telling about the implicit concatenation of RX... is the more important point for me. Thanks so far, Michael.=20