From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Thien-Thi Nguyen Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.user Subject: Re: Stupid module and pregexp questions Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2003 00:26:43 +0200 Sender: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <877k9eobcv.fsf@raven.i.defaultvalue.org> <877k96htat.fsf@raven.i.defaultvalue.org> <200305050618.XAA10052@morrowfield.regexps.com> Reply-To: ttn@glug.org NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1067034544 20960 80.91.224.253 (24 Oct 2003 22:29:04 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2003 22:29:04 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-user@gnu.org Original-X-From: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Oct 25 00:29:02 2003 Return-path: Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1ADAQY-00066K-00 for ; Sat, 25 Oct 2003 00:29:02 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1ADAPB-0001UY-WF for guile-user@m.gmane.org; Fri, 24 Oct 2003 18:27:38 -0400 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.24) id 1ADANK-0000uN-7d for guile-user@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Oct 2003 18:25:42 -0400 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.24) id 1ADAMn-0000cq-St for guile-user@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Oct 2003 18:25:40 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.41.8] (helo=mx20.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (TLSv1:DES-CBC3-SHA:168) (Exim 4.24) id 1ADAKZ-0007io-P3 for guile-user@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Oct 2003 18:22:51 -0400 Original-Received: from [151.37.56.65] (helo=surf.glug.org) by mx20.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1ADAJ4-0003f9-Mx for guile-user@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Oct 2003 18:21:18 -0400 Original-Received: from ttn by surf.glug.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1ADAOJ-0007sg-00; Sat, 25 Oct 2003 00:26:43 +0200 Original-To: Tom Lord In-reply-to: <200305050618.XAA10052@morrowfield.regexps.com> (message from Tom Lord on Sun, 4 May 2003 23:18:08 -0700 (PDT)) X-BeenThere: guile-user@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.2 Precedence: list List-Id: General Guile related discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.user:2319 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.user:2319 From: Tom Lord Date: Sun, 4 May 2003 23:18:08 -0700 (PDT) Guile-dialect regexp choices should be (imho) no less casual than, say, number-tower choices. but a tower is an abstract model that is supported to varying degrees when it comes to compilation down to the the physical layer. why are surface regexp syntaxes different? sure, there are non-dfa-friendly approaches, so provide non-dfa-requiring compilation for those. at the bottom it's all just fixed-width NANDs and NORs (logically speaking)... thi [cc trimmed] _______________________________________________ Guile-user mailing list Guile-user@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user