Re: Raw strings (experimental patches inside)

[Stefan Monnier <monnier@IRO.UMontreal.CA>]

>> > That is not a problem significant enough to warrant the
>> > introduction of something like raw-strings.
> Oh, come on, Stefan.  That's just elitism.

No.  My immediate response was simply based on the fact that searching
for backslashes is not something people do often.  Of course, if I had
taken the time to think about it some more, I'd have pointed out that
raw strings don't help with interactive use of Emacs but only with
writing Elisp code, so "searching for backslashes" is even less of
a justification for introducing raw strings.

> If insults won't persuade you, here are some real benefits.
> raw-strings are a huge convenience when writing.[1]  They correspond to
> the way you enter a regexp to isearch, and to the documentation.  They

And here we're back at regexps.  I already agreed that they're
convenient for regexps, but pointed out that a better solution would be
to fix the regexp syntax so it doesn't backslash-escape every
special character.
That would help not just Elisp coders but Emacs users as well and would
make Elisp regexps even more readable than raw strings can ever hope to
make them.


        Stefan