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

Re: integrating PCREs



On 11/26/2013 1:51 PM, Alex Shinn wrote:
On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 2:53 AM, Michael Montague <mikemon@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I propose changing 'regexp' to 'sre-regexp' for future consistency with 'pcre-regexp'.

There will be no `pcre-regexp'.  All of the functions in
this SRFI will work with the regexps compiled by `pcre'.
That is, there is only one compiled regexp type.

I am confused. I thought 'regexp' was a procedure which took a <sre> and compiled it into an <re>. And I though 'rx' was syntax which expanded into (regexp '(: <sre> ...)).

Hmmm.... The 'rx' syntax could compile the regular _expression_ at program compile time and just expand into an <re>. Why not be able to do the same thing for PCREs? Hence, 'pcre' syntax which isn't necessary to quote the <pcre>, but is necessary so that a system could compile the regular _expression_ at program compile time rather than just expanding into (pcre-regexp <pcre>).