> On Jul 22, 2017, at 12:30 PM, David Storrs <david.sto...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> One thing that would solve a lot of this issue would be if the pregexp syntax
> added support for named captures as in Perl and the PCRE library that exports
> them.
>
> Alternatively, if 'match' made the results of a successful regexp test
> available to the bodies on the RHS then you could do the same thing by
> accessing the result list. Perhaps if match would allow the RHS to be a
> function?
This could also be a light syntactic abstraction over `cond`:
#lang at-exp racket
(define-syntax (regexp-case stx)
(syntax-case stx (=> else)
[(_ STR [PAT => PROC] ... [else . ELSE-BODY])
#'(cond
[(regexp-match PAT STR) => PROC] ...
[else . ELSE-BODY])]
[(_ STR [PAT => PROC] ...) #'(regexp-case STR [PAT => PROC] ... [else
#f])]))
(define str "[04, foo, 03.5]")
(define pat @(pregexp @~a{\[(\d+),\s*(\w+),\s*([.\d]+)}))
(regexp-case str
[pat => (λ (res) (match-let ([(list _ item-num name price) res])
(println (~a "item name: " name ", number: "
item-num ", price: $" price))))])
(regexp-case "foobar"
[#px"oo.+(.)" => (lambda (res) (println (~a "Regexp match results
were: " res)))])
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Racket Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
