Re: extended rx.el

[Stefan Monnier]

> `(repeat N SEXP)'
> `(repeat N M SEXP)'
> ;; - (repeat MIN MAX CLAUSE ...)

> Since a character is a valid SEXP/CLAUSE, if you try to unify them,
> you can't disambiguate `(repeat N M SEXP ...)' from
> `(repeat N CHARACTER SEXP ...)', so the Rx version of `repeat' can't
> allow multiple SEXP args.

So you say that the unification is (repeat N &optional M &rest sexps)?
Why not say it's either (repeat N SEXP) or (repeat N M SEXP ...) ?
I.e. if there are more than 2 args, the second is MAX.
That would be compatible with both rx and sregex, wouldn't it?


        Stefan