[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Regexps and strings once again

From: Daniel Colascione
Subject: Re: Regexps and strings once again
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2014 20:41:23 -0700
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.1.1

On 09/14/2014 07:14 PM, Stefan Monnier wrote:
>> On 09/14/2014 04:27 PM, Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen wrote:
>>> (dom-by-id dom (regexp "I \\(couldn't\\)?haz new syntax"))
> `regexp' could just as well take a new syntax.  And it doesn't have to
> return a string with a funny text-property but can really return a new
> kind of object.
> I think it could be fairly elegant.
>>>>>> "Daniel" == Daniel Colascione <address@hidden> writes:
>> I've been working on an NFA combinator facility lately.  The basic idea
>> is that you don't work in terms of regular expressions per se, but in
>> terms of state-matching machines (like the ones Ragel has) that you can
>> combine using the standard union, repeat, negative, and intersection
>> operators.
> Do you really mean NFA or are you actually manipulating DFAs?
> If NFAs, how do you implement intersection?

Actual NFAs --- the kinda-sorta working code is in the Jezebel repo;
I've been adding arbitrary predicate support. DFA construction just
produces an NFA object that happens not to contain any ambiguity, which
recognizer generators can treat specially. I haven't actually
implemented intersection yet, although I suspect the dumb union-negation
algorithm should be good enough after DFA construction and minimization.
If it isn't, I'll just see what Ragel does and do that.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]