Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!news.mixmin.net!weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!ecngs!feeder2.ecngs.de!81.171.88.16.MISMATCH!hq-usenetpeers.eweka.nl!hq-usenetpeers.eweka.nl!xlned.com!feeder7.xlned.com!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed3.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsgate.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.002 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 1.00; '*S*': 0.00; 'syntax': 0.04; 'expressions': 0.07; 'matches': 0.07; 'string': 0.09; 'friday,': 0.09; 'subject:language': 0.09; 'subject:string': 0.09; 'template': 0.14; 'expressions.': 0.16; 'for,': 0.16; 'lowercase': 0.16; 'mode,': 0.16; 'nightmare.': 0.16; 'subject:generation': 0.16; 'subject:random': 0.16; 'template,': 0.16; 'terribly': 0.16; 'uppercase': 0.16; 'sat,': 0.16; 'language': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.18; '>>>': 0.22; 'aug': 0.22; "aren't": 0.24; 'module,': 0.24; 'fairly': 0.24; 'paul': 0.24; 'equivalent': 0.26; 'pass': 0.26; 'least': 0.26; 'certain': 0.27; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.27; 'am,': 0.29; 'matching': 0.30; 'message-id:@mail.gmail.com': 0.30; "i'm": 0.30; 'work.': 0.31; 'contrast,': 0.31; 'equivalent.': 0.31; 'though.': 0.31; 'regular': 0.32; 'could': 0.34; "can't": 0.35; 'but': 0.35; 'received:google.com': 0.35; 'there': 0.35; 'too': 0.37; 'e.g.': 0.38; 'to:addr:python-list': 0.38; 'expect': 0.39; 'sure': 0.39; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.39; 'how': 0.40; 'expression': 0.60; 'ian': 0.60; 'august': 0.61; 'more': 0.64; 'series': 0.66; 'further,': 0.74; 'case?': 0.84; 'regular,': 0.84; 'difficult,': 0.91 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; bh=zMFyZpJMhwcwDmpNBJAvjEh83JDzteYh9+HWpSIGNW0=; b=qsh8WWQyoV+622YsgjIOUcHwXaqpuZRsXZOvvfgvNLlilrEwz/z1kYKTy57YRCBEWg dcxyY6fgTYvXEfuOa6L6zmA/HBr+gtBu0BiBM3i2XRlMcQ12XEUdsbfhaAA/ySulk82o IutQ3TAV667GDK6H4WBp2/ym2iFbCpihHZHwbBH6mDdapRNE0JTuU1Yt9PSNxzV06yw3 NS+zdGizUwXQLy0UZDyXysISKvaj6Nh2ZxtkkmEhHBl6BiSLQsUqTc3YSY9HhnS1rWj2 E00H1bI8MkrncR9lsuN5zkSLg8By6v1sQvdzhr4jhaN4YmUwJOJaafxVTlB0NOGUxzbI Cosg== X-Received: by 10.70.88.105 with SMTP id bf9mr29370062pdb.54.1407571078955; Sat, 09 Aug 2014 00:57:58 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <14d94692-2257-4dfb-a82f-f1674a839233@googlegroups.com> <58187503-1651-4eca-a131-49f474148f62@googlegroups.com> From: Ian Kelly Date: Sat, 9 Aug 2014 01:57:18 -0600 Subject: Re: Template language for random string generation To: Python Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Message-ID: Lines: 26 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6 X-Trace: 1407571088 news.xs4all.nl 2869 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:48801 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl X-Received-Bytes: 5104 X-Received-Body-CRC: 2409833380 Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:75936 On Sat, Aug 9, 2014 at 1:49 AM, Ian Kelly wrote: > On Sat, Aug 9, 2014 at 12:52 AM, Paul Wolf wrote: >> On Friday, 8 August 2014 23:03:18 UTC+1, Ian wrote: >>> Have you given any thought to adding a validation mode, where the user >>> provides a template and a string and wants to know if the string >>> matches the template? >> >> Isn't that what regular expressions are? Or do you have a clarifying use case? >> >> strgen is provided as the converse of regular expressions. > > The syntax is not equivalent though. You can't take a strgen template, > pass it into the re module, and just expect it to work. > > Also, I'm not sure how best to go about writing a regular expression > for, e.g. "12 or more letters, digits, and punctuation, including at > least one each of uppercase letter, lowercase letter, digit, and > punctuation". I'm fairly certain that language is regular, but > actually matching it with a regular expression would be a nightmare. To clarify further, validating that *without* using a regular expression is not too terribly difficult, but the value that I see in validating it with a strgen is that one could then be sure that one's string generation and validation were equivalent. In contrast, if you have a strgen for generation and a series of string manipulations for validation, then it's hard to be certain there aren't any differences.