I think this is a great idea.
On Oct 8, 5:08 am, Rich Hickey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Oct 7, 11:18 pm, Chouser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Is it bad etiquette to reply to myself? I thought it might be useful
> > to compare the proposed syntax with that of other languages with good
> > regex support.
>
> > I tried all the examples from my previous message in Perl, Python,
> > Ruby, and JavaScript. All but Python have literal regex syntax, while
> > Python has a raw string format that is generally used for regular
> > expressions. All but JavaScript have multiple quote characters which
> > allowed me to use double quotes just like Clojure:
>
> > Clojure: #"foo"
> > Perl: m"foo" (although m/foo/ or just /foo/ is more common)
> > Python: r"foo" (you can also use r'foo' or r"""foo""")
> > Ruby: %r"foo" (or %r/foo/ or just /foo/)
> > JS: /foo/
>
> > All the examples for the proposed new Clojure syntax work the same in
> > all these languages (with the exception of example 4 in JavaScript,
> > where \a means a plain letter a instead of ASCII 7). If instead you
> > escape things the way you currently have to in Clojure, many of the
> > expressions don't work or mean something different in the other
> > languages.
>
> > In other words, under the proposed syntax Clojure regex literals would
> > be less surprising for people used to any of these other languages.
>
> Will existing Clojure regex (consumer) code need to change, i.e. will
> people need to modify their existing #"" literals and if so in what
> way?
>
> Rich
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Clojure" group.
To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
