From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Tom <levelhalom@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel
Subject: Re: Structural regular expressions
Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2010 16:53:10 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <loom.20100909T184729-130@post.gmane.org>
References: <loom.20100907T212314-566@post.gmane.org>
	<AANLkTimYvE0aqrG-OQxuY6BTca7ngzrfQUa62mOxyV=+@mail.gmail.com>
	<loom.20100907T222143-475@post.gmane.org>
	<87sk1lt4uf.fsf@gmail.com>
	<loom.20100909T173620-764@post.gmane.org>
	<AANLkTikXVHoRKxTjcVkb6XM_A67vyREoq=_8A-AtiK6Y@mail.gmail.com>
	<loom.20100909T181924-90@post.gmane.org>
	<AANLkTinz+YUjPs_Ax8mikR5bMGjYxessj2YgWvJX-AUy@mail.gmail.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1284051210 3455 80.91.229.12 (9 Sep 2010 16:53:30 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2010 16:53:30 +0000 (UTC)
To: emacs-devel@gnu.org
Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Sep 09 18:53:29 2010
Return-path: <emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org
Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165])
	by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>)
	id 1OtkNM-0005Rg-S6
	for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 09 Sep 2010 18:53:29 +0200
Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36483 helo=lists.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
	id 1OtkNM-0006nH-Dp
	for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 09 Sep 2010 12:53:28 -0400
Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=50069 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OtkNG-0006my-Fc
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 09 Sep 2010 12:53:24 -0400
Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org>) id 1OtkNF-0005eL-64
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 09 Sep 2010 12:53:22 -0400
Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:55230)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org>) id 1OtkNF-0005de-0i
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 09 Sep 2010 12:53:21 -0400
Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org>) id 1OtkNC-0005L2-J0
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 09 Sep 2010 18:53:18 +0200
Original-Received: from 94-21-223-187.pool.digikabel.hu ([94.21.223.187])
	by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian))
	id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00
	for <emacs-devel@gnu.org>; Thu, 09 Sep 2010 18:53:18 +0200
Original-Received: from levelhalom by 94-21-223-187.pool.digikabel.hu with local
	(Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00
	for <emacs-devel@gnu.org>; Thu, 09 Sep 2010 18:53:18 +0200
X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/
Original-Lines: 21
Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org
X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: sea.gmane.org
User-Agent: Loom/3.14 (http://gmane.org/)
X-Loom-IP: 94.21.223.187 (Opera/9.80 (Windows NT 6.1; U;
	en) Presto/2.6.30 Version/10.61)
X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3)
X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." <emacs-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:129825
Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel/129825>

Lennart Borgman <lennart.borgman <at> gmail.com> writes:

> > And what happens then if I want to regexp replace "foo\s-*bar"? It would
> > still be susceptible to the above mentioned boundary problem, so it's
> > not a robust workaround.
> 
> It does not look to me like it would be susceptible to that problem.
> Maybe I am misunderstanding you. Can you explain more in detail why
> you think it would be a problem with the solution I suggested? (Please
> note that I said the parts outside of the multiple narrowing should be
> treated as "whitespace", not "invisible" or "non-existent".)

Maybe I am misunderstanding you.

As I understood your suggestion:

<.....foo> ... whitespace ... <bar ... >

Since \s- as a regexp matches whitespace the regexp "foo\s-*bar" would match 
the end of the first range and the beginning of the second range separated
by whitespace.