Re: Raw string literals in Emacs lisp.

[David Caldwell]

On 7/30/14 1:28 PM, Ted Zlatanov wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Jul 2014 13:58:37 -0700 David Caldwell <address@hidden> wrote: 
> 
> DC> Why not, then, skip rawstrings completely and go directly to a regular
> DC> expression reader: #r// (or even just #//) instead of #r""?
> 
> For shell commands, for instance, it would be convenient to have
> rawstrings because they often have internal backslash escapes.

That's precisely the point I made later in my email—rawstrings used in
shell don't want things like \n escaped, but regexps do (otherwise you
have to add "\n" literal support to the regexp engine). There's 2 usages
with competing semantics trying to use one generic interface. I still
posit that having a syntax directly for regexps would be beneficial. And
I think focusing on regexps is more important in Emacs as it happens
more than complicated shell commands.

Sadly it sounds like a the #r// would be a no-go due to the Emacs
requirements of parsing it in reverse (I assume because '/' is a valid
lisp symbol character).

-David

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature