To add to what others have said: * Typos and lack of spell-checking, such as "occurances" vs "occurrences"
* Poor grammar, such as "Other characters that has special meaning
includes:"
* You dropped version-related notes like "New in version 2.4"
* You seem to love the use of <HR>s, while docs.python.org uses them
sparingly
* The category names you created, "Wildcards", "Repetition Qualifiers",
and so forth, don't help me understand regular expressions any better
than the original document
* Your document dropped some basic explanations of how regular
expressions work, without a replacement text:
Regular expressions can be concatenated to form new regular
expressions; if A and B are both regular expressions, then AB is
also a regular expression. In general, if a string p matches A and
another string q matches B, the string pq will match AB. [...] Thus,
complex expressions can easily be constructed from simpler primitive
expressions like the ones described here.
Instead, you start off with one unclear example ("a+" matching
"aaaahh!") and one misleading example (a regular expression that
matches some tiny subset of valid e-mail addresses)
* You write
Characters that have special meanings in regex do not have special
meanings when used inside []. For example, '[b+]' does not mean one
or more b; It just matches 'b' or '+'.
and then go on to explain that backslash still has special meaning; I
see that the original documentation has a similar problem, but this
just goes to show that you aren't improving the accuracy or clarity of
the documentation in most cases, just rewriting it to suit your own
style. Or maybe just as an excuse to write offensive things like "[a]
fucking toy whose max use is as a simplest calculator"
I can't see anything to make me recommend this documentation over the
existing documentation.
Jeff
pgp5Y4v6p63xE.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
