> > 4. Related to Q3: what does "xy" as that argument mean exactly? > > a. #rx"[xy]" > > b. #rx"[xy]+" > > c. #rx"xy" > > d. #rx"(?:xy)+" > > > > Good question. d. would be the simplest case for newbies, but > > b. might be more useful. I think several other languages avoid this > > issue by using only one character as the separator. > > The complication is that with " " or " \t" it seems that you'd want b, > and with "&" you'd want c. (Maybe even make "&" equivalent to > #rx" *& *" -- that looks like it's too much guessing.) > > And you're also making a point for: > > e. Throw an error, must be a single-character string. > > BTW, this question is important because it affects other functions, so > I'd like to resolve it before doing anything. >
If we make things as simple-but-useful as possible, then I'd go for a single char separator with option b/d. (I don't think there are many cases where one would want a string as a separator?) Personally, I don't like much when functions ask for a character because the #\ looks ugly to me, but it still makes more sense than asking for a string that must have a single character. Laurent
_________________________ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
