Re: Stupid module and pregexp questions

[Tom Lord]

       >> I have some experience in regexp implementation, so may I offer my
       >> $0.02?

       > Much appreciated, in fact.

Thanks.  Let me therefore use up my good karma and overstep my bounds:


       > With respect to which syntax we might choose, I don't really have a
       > strong preference for one or the other, but my default inclination
       > might be libpcre since it's the syntax that both perl and python
       > support 

You can not lead by following.   You can not hack without
understanding. </Thien-Thi-mode>

(Ahem!) The distinction between PCRE and other matchers (posix
matchers in genral, Rx specifically - is not _syntactic_.  It's
semantic and has deep implications for implementation techniques and
performance, in both short and long time frames.  So, choices you make
today, assuming that guile persists and spreads, have _long_ term
consequences.

Now, to be sure, a little compatibility here and there can get people
to make leaps from here to there.   I could point, for example, to
emacs' "posix-looking-at":  it's a compatibility hack that's "off to
the side", but there when you need it.

Guile-dialect regexp choices should be (imho) no less casual than,
say, number-tower choices.


-t