bug#46910: closed (27.1; (elisp) RX doc)

[GNU bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Sun, 26 Sep 2021 14:44:42 +0200
with message-id <1CB22E13-F19B-4B9B-B31C-6F5CFC9E8A51@acm.org>
and subject line Re: bug#46910: 27.1; (elisp) RX doc
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #46910,
regarding 27.1; (elisp) RX doc
to be marked as done.

(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact
help-debbugs@gnu.org.)


-- 
46910: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=46910
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs@gnu.org with problems
> --- Begin Message ---
>
>
>
> Subject: 
>
> 27.1; (elisp) RX doc
>
>
>
>
> Date: 
>
> Wed, 3 Mar 2021 23:15:59 +0000
>
>
>
>
> 1. `Rx Constructs' doesn't explain that the "constructs" are used in
> arguments to macro `rx'.
>
> E.g.: "some-string" is not an RX expression.
>       (rx "some-string") is an RX expression.
>
> Please make this clear.
>
> 2. `Rx Constructs': Don't show things like `\sCODE' without saying what
> CODE means.  If the column title for the table explaining RX names is
> `Syntax character' or `Category character' then that's apparently what
> CODE corresponds to for `\sCODE' or `\cCODE'.  But there's no way to
> know that unless you're already familiar with `\s' and `\c' syntax.
>
> 3. `Rx Constructs', `Zero-width assertions': Call this `Zero-width
> matching' or some such.
>
> 4. `Rx Functions': RX-EXPR is used as parameter name for what is, I
> guess an Rx construct (the language used in `Rx Construct').  Expression
> or construct?  Make it clear that RX-EXPR is an RX construct, if that's
> what it is.  And consider adding an xref to `Rx Construct'.
>
> 5. `Rx Functions': A couple places talk about `'regexp' forms', but
> those are specified nowhere, AFAICT.  The same places talk about
> 'literal' forms, which are specified, but which don't seem to work (?).
> (See bug #46909.)
>
>
> In GNU Emacs 27.1 (build 1, x86_64-w64-mingw32)
>  of 2020-08-12
> Repository revision: 86d8d76aa36037184db0b2897c434cdaab1a9ae8
> Windowing system distributor `Microsoft Corp.', version 10.0.19041
> Configured using:
>  `configure --without-dbus --host=x86_64-w64-mingw32
>  --without-compress-install 'CFLAGS=-O2 -static''
>
>
>
>
> --- End Message ---
> --- Begin Message ---
>
>
>
> Subject: 
>
> Re: bug#46910: 27.1; (elisp) RX doc
>
>
>
>
> Date: 
>
> Sun, 26 Sep 2021 14:44:42 +0200
>
>
>
>
> 25 sep. 2021 kl. 17.25 skrev Stefan Kangas <stefan@marxist.se>:
> > 
> > Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com> writes:
> > 
> >> 1. `Rx Constructs' doesn't explain that the "constructs" are used in
> >> arguments to macro `rx'.
>
> Yes, I've added an explanation.
>
> >> 2. `Rx Constructs': Don't show things like `\sCODE' without saying what
> >> CODE means.  If the column title for the table explaining RX names is
> >> `Syntax character' or `Category character' then that's apparently what
> >> CODE corresponds to for `\sCODE' or `\cCODE'.  But there's no way to
> >> know that unless you're already familiar with `\s' and `\c' syntax.
>
> That's a valid point; now elaborated.
>
> If anything I'd like to move the tables of syntax and (especially) category 
> names to a separate page since they are rarely consulted and take up a lot of 
> space. Not sure how to best do that.
>
> >> 3. `Rx Constructs', `Zero-width assertions': Call this `Zero-width
> >> matching' or some such.
>
> Thank you, but it's established terminology and immediately explained in the 
> first sentence.
>
> >> 4. `Rx Functions': RX-EXPR is used as parameter name for what is, I
> >> guess an Rx construct
>
> That was a clear mistake, now fixed -- thanks.
>
> >> 5. `Rx Functions': A couple places talk about `'regexp' forms', but
> >> those are specified nowhere
>
> The `regexp` and `literal` forms are both documented on the previous page.
>
> For good measure, I also added some examples to illustrate the difference 
> between `rx` and `rx-to-string`.
>
>
>
> --- End Message ---