Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!aioe.org!news.stack.nl!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed5.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 0.001 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 1.00; '*S*': 0.00; 'python.': 0.04; 'subject:Python': 0.05; 'disagree': 0.07; 'python': 0.08; 'expressions.': 0.09; 'module?': 0.09; 'parsing': 0.09; '25,': 0.12; 'argument': 0.15; 'folks': 0.15; 'cc:addr:python-list': 0.15; 'syntax': 0.15; 'attracts': 0.16; 'compact': 0.16; 'dressing': 0.16; 'germane': 0.16; 'maybe,': 0.16; 'notations': 0.16; 'pypi.': 0.16; 'pythonic': 0.16; 'pythonic.': 0.16; 'subject:expression': 0.16; 'subject:regular': 0.16; 'subject:syntax': 0.16; 'three.': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.16; 'wed,': 0.17; 'of.': 0.18; 'perl': 0.18; 'jan': 0.19; 'programming': 0.20; 'subject:not': 0.21; 'cc:no real name:2**0': 0.21; '(or': 0.22; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.22; 'produces': 0.23; 'received:74.125.82.174': 0.24; 'cc:2**0': 0.25; 'module': 0.26; 'pm,': 0.26; 'mainly': 0.27; 'message-id:@mail.gmail.com': 0.28; 'expressions': 0.28; 'matches': 0.28; 'cc:addr:python.org': 0.29; 'class': 0.29; 'discussion.': 0.30; 'fans': 0.30; 'syntax,': 0.30; 'version': 0.31; 'actually': 0.32; 'does': 0.32; 'familiar': 0.32; 'modules': 0.32; 'decide': 0.33; 'all.': 0.34; 'received:74.125.82': 0.34; 'window': 0.35; 'regular': 0.35; 'but': 0.37; 'received:74.125': 0.37; 'received:google.com': 0.37; 'using': 0.37; 'not,': 0.37; 'could': 0.37; 'some': 0.38; 'room': 0.38; 'put': 0.38; 'think': 0.38; 'easier': 0.38; 'difficult': 0.39; 'why': 0.39; 'johnson': 0.39; 'subject:: ': 0.39; 'more': 0.61; 'your': 0.61; 'here.': 0.64; 'believe': 0.65; 'alternative': 0.65; 'owners': 0.66; 'show': 0.67; 'intuitive': 0.67; 'note:': 0.69; 'proud': 0.70; 'alternative.': 0.84; 'ian,': 0.84; 'many,': 0.93 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=bZUsfXABLei4L/cyNU+o2SNMnaq5jCmhGPUVyEyrfSE=; b=pP+ip/ZzZKwof30aILNkRrYIjPrIP+98WaGqh+CQfaoAXjQFk682RvpI/p2fo8uwnm Sc7F89Es8E/oCdif9tzneXbAzGLQm9aqDl5bGXPSoxmgCnpHj7IJB7c9p1nlQUiZJLCp rUrjpC8YC2mwGjL/NT7+tOQkeoYbI2z3hvF8M= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <30949a2a-bfd4-4d22-a56b-22b1c6cdf1e8@m11g2000yqe.googlegroups.com> From: Ian Kelly Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 16:36:45 -0700 Subject: Re: PyWart: Python regular expression syntax is not intuitive. To: Rick Johnson Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: python-list@python.org X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 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: 38 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6 X-Trace: 1327534637 news.xs4all.nl 6876 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:49849 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.python:19448 On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 2:19 PM, Rick Johnson wrote: > I disagree here. > Whist some people may be "die-hard" fans of the un-intuitive perl > regex syntax, i believe many, if not exponentially MORE people would > like to have a better alternative. Do i want to remove the current > "well established" re module? No. But i would like to create a new > regex module that is more pythonic. A regex module that we can be > proud of. And just maybe, a regex module that "sets the bar" for all > other regular expressions. Compact regex notations are inherently unpythonic. While your reimplementation may be more intuitive to you, I don't think that it's more pythonic at all. > Window dressing is important Ian, if not, then shop owners would not > continue to show displays in their shop windows. What does window > dressing do exactly? It attracts the masses, and without the masses > all merchants will eventually go out of buisness. Note: my argument > HAS NOTHING to do with the number of folks programming python (or any > language). The argument is focused on module sustainability in a > community. Modules that are morbidly DIFFICULT to learn do not last. Well, FWIW, I think that the current re module was easier for me to learn than your version would have been, mainly because the re module matches the syntax that I was already familiar with well before I started using Python. If you think you can do better, though, I encourage you to actually write your regex module and put it up on PyPI. > I know about PyParsing but i believe we have room for PyParsing and a > more Pythonic take on Perl style regular expressions. I don't see why > we could not keep all three. Let the people decide what is best for > them. PyParsing produces recursive descent parsers. It's an alternative to regular expressions for a different class of parsing problems, not a replacement, and so it's not particularly germane to this discussion.