* Re: bug#12665: regexp fault for closing square bracket within character class
[not found] ` <CAMFYt2Y9fv-XfrDktn+kFBfen8k2tFaWnPSsCoNM0z9uZtCT=g@mail.gmail.com>
@ 2012-10-18 12:18 ` Marijn
2012-10-18 17:26 ` Mark H Weaver
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Marijn @ 2012-10-18 12:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Panicz Maciej Godek; +Cc: Mark H Weaver, guile-devel
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 18-10-12 11:44, Panicz Maciej Godek wrote:
>> As documented in "Syntax of Regular Expressions" of the Emacs
>> manual (to which section 6.15 of the Guile manual refers):
>>
>> To include a `]' in a character set, you must make it the first
>> character. For example, `[]a]' matches `]' or `a'. To include
>> a `-', write `-' as the first or last character of the set, or
>> put it after a range. Thus, `[]-]' matches both `]' and `-'.
>
> OK, I see. I guess I got used to PCRE for too long :) Sorry for my
> mistake.
``Regular expressions crammed into string-syntax'' really needs to be
deprecated in Scheme implementations. SRE[1][2] is more expressive and
doesn't suffer from such exceptions.
Marijn
[1]:http://sjamaan.ath.cx/posts/lispy-dsl-sre.html
[2]:http://www.scsh.net/docu/post/sre.html
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://www.enigmail.net/
iEYEARECAAYFAlB/830ACgkQp/VmCx0OL2w8UACcCYQ6pBYs2cbBS2CrdlnkYmuY
5gcAnj6fDJfQRS2Rm+IwpaTSgaeN/Ev/
=EZq3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: bug#12665: regexp fault for closing square bracket within character class
2012-10-18 12:18 ` bug#12665: regexp fault for closing square bracket within character class Marijn
@ 2012-10-18 17:26 ` Mark H Weaver
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Mark H Weaver @ 2012-10-18 17:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Marijn; +Cc: guile-devel, Panicz Maciej Godek
Marijn <hkBst@gentoo.org> writes:
> ``Regular expressions crammed into string-syntax'' really needs to be
> deprecated in Scheme implementations. SRE[1][2] is more expressive and
> doesn't suffer from such exceptions.
I wholehearted agree that SRE is far superior, and that we should
implement SRE and strongly encourage its use, but I wouldn't go so far
as to _deprecate_ traditional regexp syntax. Like it or not, regexp
syntax is burned into the minds of users everywhere, and for many common
cases it is adequate and more concise.
Patches welcome :)
Mark
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2012-10-18 17:26 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <CAMFYt2apoaVBnmc1bOtDUq2gu643znVpJn0QH290iig5qT9-oQ@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <87txtsqt1y.fsf@tines.lan>
[not found] ` <CAMFYt2Y9fv-XfrDktn+kFBfen8k2tFaWnPSsCoNM0z9uZtCT=g@mail.gmail.com>
2012-10-18 12:18 ` bug#12665: regexp fault for closing square bracket within character class Marijn
2012-10-18 17:26 ` Mark H Weaver
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).