[Python-Dev] Re: Re: Missing arguments in RE functions

[Fredrik Lundh]

Michael Chermside wrote:

> Fredrik, a less hostile response would be appropriate here. No one
> knows every detail of every API of any reasonably sized library
> (like Python's).

We're not talking about Python's library, we're talking about Python's RE
library.  It's not that big, really.  The documentation is five moderately-sized
HTML pages, plus a page with examples.  Seven functions (plus two trivial
variations) and two object types.  You cannot use the library at all without
knowing the stuff that's discussed on the first, third, and fifth page; the two
other pages discuss pos/endpos issues within the first few paragraphs.  Are
we trying to optimize Python for people who won't read evenly-numbered
sections?

> On the whole, there are MORE indiviual "pieces" to the
> API but because of orthogonality the API as a whole is
> simpler.

Given that there's no way to order the arguments consistently (since some
arguments apply to the compilation process, other to the match process),
you're obviously using "orthogonal" and "simple" in the Perl sense ;-)

</F>