Re: skip-chars-forward v. re-search-forward

[Dave Love]

Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes:

> The comparison between search-forward and skip-chars-forward
> does not seem meaningful to me, because they do different jobs.
> The only case which both of these functions can do is
> (search-forward "a") and (skip-chars-forward "^a").

That's probably not an uncommon use, and it looks as though the
optimizer might usefully translate one to the other.  I was originally
comparing with re-search-forward, though.  The skip-chars versions
still don't seem to have a big advantage, and they have the
disadvantage of not supporting char classes.