From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Rob Browning Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.user Subject: Re: Stupid module and pregexp questions Date: Mon, 05 May 2003 02:47:20 -0500 Sender: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Message-ID: <87of2h25tj.fsf@raven.i.defaultvalue.org> References: <877k9eobcv.fsf@raven.i.defaultvalue.org> <200304292321.QAA04172@morrowfield.regexps.com> <877k96htat.fsf@raven.i.defaultvalue.org> <200305050618.XAA10052@morrowfield.regexps.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1052120962 6963 80.91.224.249 (5 May 2003 07:49:22 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 5 May 2003 07:49:22 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-user@gnu.org Original-X-From: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon May 05 09:49:16 2003 Return-path: Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 19Cahd-0001kC-00 for ; Mon, 05 May 2003 09:48:01 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10.13) id 19Cahq-0000PF-03 for guile-user@m.gmane.org; Mon, 05 May 2003 03:48:14 -0400 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10.13) id 19CahL-0000LM-00 for guile-user@gnu.org; Mon, 05 May 2003 03:47:43 -0400 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10.13) id 19Cah0-00005H-00 for guile-user@gnu.org; Mon, 05 May 2003 03:47:23 -0400 Original-Received: from dsl093-098-016.wdc1.dsl.speakeasy.net ([66.93.98.16] helo=defaultvalue.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10.13) id 19Cah0-00004r-00 for guile-user@gnu.org; Mon, 05 May 2003 03:47:22 -0400 Original-Received: from raven.i.defaultvalue.org (raven.i.defaultvalue.org [192.168.1.7]) by defaultvalue.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45CF71FA3; Mon, 5 May 2003 02:47:21 -0500 (CDT) Original-Received: by raven.i.defaultvalue.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 03C4B2150F7; Mon, 5 May 2003 02:47:21 -0500 (CDT) Original-To: Tom Lord In-Reply-To: <200305050618.XAA10052@morrowfield.regexps.com> (Tom Lord's message of "Sun, 4 May 2003 23:18:08 -0700 (PDT)") User-Agent: Gnus/5.1001 (Gnus v5.10.1) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) X-BeenThere: guile-user@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1b5 Precedence: list List-Id: General Guile related discussions List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe: , Errors-To: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.user:1908 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.user:1908 Tom Lord writes: > (Ahem!) The distinction between PCRE and other matchers (posix > matchers in genral, Rx specifically - is not _syntactic_. It's > semantic and has deep implications for implementation techniques and > performance, in both short and long time frames. So, choices you make > today, assuming that guile persists and spreads, have _long_ term > consequences. Sure, but a counter argument would be that just guaranteeing that we have elisp, or perl, or "well defined POSIX" (perhaps Rx[1]) regular expressions available (for example) doesn't say anything positive or negative about what *else* we might have available, and it does mean that anyone that is familiar and comfortable with whichever one we might pick can reach for guile more easily whenever they want to get something done (something they already know how to do). They can always learn the better thing later, once we have it. Note that it's possible I'm trying to fix something that isn't broken here. If all (or nearly all) of the libs that guile might choose to link against for (ice-9 regex) on various platforms are consistent with each other, then I should perhaps withdraw my suggestions. I was just under the impression that they vary substantially, and wanted to have at least one familiar regex subsystem in the core that eliminated the variance. Also, if one of the main things you're arguing is that perl and emacs-style regexes have extensions that we need to do without if we want good performance, then I'm not trying to argue against that assertion. I'm really just ruminating on the advisability of a well-defined, invariant, and reasonably familiar regex syntax for guile's core. I'd probably be perfectly happy with a good POSIX implementation in the core, perhaps even with a subset of POSIX if dropping certain bits were somehow important... Thanks again [1] Of course, I completely understand if you don't feel you're in a position to make that available for inclusion ATM. -- Rob Browning rlb @defaultvalue.org, @linuxdevel.com, and @debian.org Previously @cs.utexas.edu GPG starting 2002-11-03 = 14DD 432F AE39 534D B592 F9A0 25C8 D377 8C7E 73A4 _______________________________________________ Guile-user mailing list Guile-user@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user