Kenneth McDonald:
> * Construction of re's is object oriented, and does not require any
> knowledge of re syntax.
I have partially done something similar, so I am interested.
Does rex outputs normal REs? Or does it wraps them in some way? A
normal RE output has some advantages, even if you can't have some
functionalities.
> * I'm not entirely sure the API is ideal. Some discussion is needed on this.
The API is probably the most important thing in this kind of code. It
requires care, good initial design, and a lot of practical usage by
some people.
> * Everything is in a single file. This should be split up.
Sometimes a single file is good too, because it makes the management
simpler, you don't need to keep directories, etc. So you can keep it
that way, or maybe you can (automatically) keep two versions, one
single file and one splitted in more files.
Many constants: maybe there are ways to design the code to use less
constants, like making it accept strings as arguments instead of
constants, like rex.fun("foo") instead of rex.fun(rex.FOO), like
Tkinter does.
> I would like to avoid putting this up on sourceforge as I think it would
> do much better at a site aimed specifically at Python development.
Cheeseshop?
Bye,
bearophile
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
