[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Rationale for split-string?
From: |
Richard Stallman |
Subject: |
Re: Rationale for split-string? |
Date: |
Sat, 19 Apr 2003 00:14:31 -0400 |
RS> I know of no reason to want them to be different.
Fantastic! Steve Turnbull is a thorough guy, so I'm sure that he will
send you a patch so you can fix GNU/Emacs' split-string.
First we need to figure out what is the right behavior for that
function. People are already discussing the question...
> (split-string ",,data,," ",")
> => ("" "data" "")
Is that wrong? If so, what result do you think is right?
("" "" "data" "" "") could be argued for, but I am not sure
it is better.
A gross hack is to test if the last char of the regexp is ?+
and if so get rid of empty strings at start and end.
It should take care of 99% of the cases.
That is a kludge. Whatever we do, it should not be that.
- Rationale for split-string?, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2003/04/17
- Re: Rationale for split-string?, Stefan Reichör, 2003/04/17
- Re: Rationale for split-string?, Stefan Monnier, 2003/04/17
- Re: Rationale for split-string?,
Richard Stallman <=
- Re: Rationale for split-string?, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2003/04/19
- Re: Rationale for split-string?, Richard Stallman, 2003/04/20
- Re: Rationale for split-string?, Luc Teirlinck, 2003/04/20
- Re: Rationale for split-string?, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2003/04/21
- Re: Rationale for split-string?, Luc Teirlinck, 2003/04/21
- Re: Rationale for split-string?, Miles Bader, 2003/04/21
- Re: Rationale for split-string?, Luc Teirlinck, 2003/04/21
- Re: Rationale for split-string?, Jerry James, 2003/04/22
- Re: Rationale for split-string?, Eli Zaretskii, 2003/04/22
- Re: Rationale for split-string?, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2003/04/22