Adoption of perl/javascript-style regexp syntax

mats cronqvist <>
Wed Jun 3 12:01:55 CEST 2009


Robert Virding <> writes:

> 2009/6/3 mats cronqvist <>
>
>> "Richard O'Keefe" <> writes:
>>
>> > That pain level is there for a good reason: if the Erlang string
>> > syntax is giving you that much of a headache, it's because STRINGS ARE
>> > WRONG and you should almost certainly be using trees instead.
>>
>>   Alas, re wants strings, and there's not much I can do about that.
>
>
> Not quite true. The *underlying implementation* wants the regexp as a string
> but this does not mean that the user has to supply it as a string. You could
> very well allow the regexp as an AST (as well as?) and then internally
> convert it to a string.


  Scheez. The re module, as it exists in R13, wants strings. Full stop.

  You could of course write a different front end to pcre, or a pure
  erlang regexp module, or an infinite number of other fine products for
  which this isn't true, but that really has no bearing on this
  discussion.

  mats


More information about the erlang-questions mailing list