[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 115 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 115 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.

The shift from "regexp" to "rx" partway through the API feels clumsy. To
me, it signals a difference in meaning where AFAICT there isn't one.

IMHO, the `rx-match` record type should rather be called "regexp-match",
or simply "match". This would align the rx-* procedures with the rest of
the API in clarity of names. (I recognize the collision on
`regexp-match?`, but that procedure could instead be called
"regexp-occurs?" or somesuch, which I'd argue is more descriptive

I like irregex's example here, with its nice, explicit "irregex-match-"

(Sorry for what some might consider bikeshedding, but I do think good
names matter.)


P.S. Unrelatedly, I agree re: `<-` replacing `=>`.