From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: For text processing, which is more powerful, emacs or perl? Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 08:58:20 -0500 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="38092"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org To: Jean Louis Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Dec 20 14:59:23 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 1kqzF5-0009oa-OD for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 20 Dec 2020 14:59:23 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38326 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kqzF4-0003YB-QD for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 20 Dec 2020 08:59:22 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:46602) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kqzED-0003Vl-H9 for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 20 Dec 2020 08:58:29 -0500 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:20027) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kqzE8-0001z3-Rz for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 20 Dec 2020 08:58:28 -0500 Original-Received: from pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 8CCC580855; Sun, 20 Dec 2020 08:58:23 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 2B18B80055; Sun, 20 Dec 2020 08:58:22 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1608472702; bh=gW61vDKRAMsWzJ2sy0vi/aUTssHgASTSOf3oJe3shOE=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=MGjg0orWjI7YkgZiaHFt6sDGHC4LiX6kp3E3sMWG3/k2NMynSAdgwFIHJv+RBMNQW PHa40HTfbbJHD78ZUkOkAhPgkpqH8xijfcBrFjLAGM7eKiaMqaWPpRLXIdoyL04x4Y 85IV4HeT9nGBQmQ1oyFmqEEZPGzNWpPsfmmDODY4mVTHg5ewQrDX49lB0QEFcf5w1a HIQd3KoDV4pk8Rceq5g166kr8G0u3ZS6seVY/Tf92gAy1YHX7sJICVe+ehK45LNx1C kUoHF+JgddPDWivs61QVFq3BQ8JLdkRMFt5F8eDE2r+Lj3uATF5gTB3K+V9dNComli A8eN/fn6wVEGA== Original-Received: from alfajor (69-165-136-52.dsl.teksavvy.com [69.165.136.52]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F0A2E120370; Sun, 20 Dec 2020 08:58:21 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: (Jean Louis's message of "Sun, 20 Dec 2020 08:23:10 +0300") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-Spam_score_int: -22 X-Spam_score: -2.3 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URI_DOTEDU=1.999 autolearn=ham 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:126652 Archived-At: >> > 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/ Maybe a more modern contender would be OMeta https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OMeta Stefan