[Python-ideas] What about regexp string litterals : re".*" ?

[Abe Dillon]

>
> I feel like that borders on a bit too wordy...


I think the use of words instead of symbols is one of the things that makes
Python so readable. The ternary operator is done with words:

value = option1 if condition else option2

reads almost like English, while:

value = condition ? option1: option2;

Is just weird.

I can read Verbal Expressions very quickly and understand exactly what's
going on. If I have a decent IDE, I can write them almost as easily. I see
no problem with wordiness if it means I don't have to stare at the code and
scratch my head longer, or worse, open a reference to help me translate it
(which is invariably the case when I look at regular expressions).

On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 8:16 PM, Ryan Gonzalez <rymg19 at gmail.com> wrote:

> I feel like that borders on a bit too wordy...
>
> Personally, I'd like to see something like Felix's regular definitions:
>
>
> http://felix-lang.org/share/src/web/tut/regexp_01.fdoc#
> Regular_definitions._h
>
>
> --
> Ryan (ライアン)
> Yoko Shimomura > ryo (supercell/EGOIST) > Hiroyuki Sawano >> everyone else
> http://refi64.com
>
> On Mar 29, 2017 3:30 PM, "Abe Dillon" <abedillon at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> My 2 cents is that regular expressions are pretty un-pythonic because of
> their horrible readability. I would much rather see Python adopt something
> like Verbal Expressions ( https://github.com/VerbalExp
> ressions/PythonVerbalExpressions ) into the standard library than add
> special syntax support for normal REs.
>
> On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 3:31 AM, Paul Moore <p.f.moore at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 28 March 2017 at 08:54, Simon D. <simon at acoeuro.com> wrote:
>> > I believe that the u"" notation in Python 2.7 is defined by while
>> > importing the unicode_litterals module.
>>
>> That's not true. The u"..." syntax is part of the language. from
>> future import unicode_literals is something completely different.
>>
>> > Each regexp lib could provide its instanciation of regexp litteral
>> > notation.
>>
>> The Python language has no way of doing that - user (or library)
>> defined literals are not possible.
>>
>> > And if only the default one does, it would still be won for the
>> > beginers, and the majority of persons using the stdlib.
>>
>> How? You've yet to prove that having a regex literal form is an
>> improvement over re.compile(r'put your regex here'). You've asserted
>> it, but that's a matter of opinion. We'd need evidence of real-life
>> code that was clearly improved by the existence of your proposed
>> construct.
>>
>> Paul
>> _______________________________________________
>> Python-ideas mailing list
>> Python-ideas at python.org
>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas
>> Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Python-ideas mailing list
> Python-ideas at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas
> Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-ideas/attachments/20170329/c5284b6b/attachment.html>