>> On Mar 3, 2016, at 11:00 AM, k...@shike2.com wrote:
>> Write it. it is not so somplex to write a regex library.
>>
>
> I'm guessing you started writing "simple", and corrected it to "complex". A
> Freudian Slip?
>
> ;)
I'm writing a compiler, so a regex library is extremely simple for me.
T
> On Mar 3, 2016, at 11:00 AM, k...@shike2.com wrote:
>
>
>> Yeah, I'd really like to get rid of boost, and possibly migrate to a
>> lighter regex lib. The problem is that no currently available libs match
>> the required feature set:
>
> Write it. it is not so somplex to write a regex library.
> Yeah, I'd really like to get rid of boost, and possibly migrate to a
> lighter regex lib. The problem is that no currently available libs match
> the required feature set:
>
Write it. it is not so somplex to write a regex library.
Regards,
On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 06:26:23PM +, Maxime Coste wrote:
> In my experience, we dont need a very powerful (and complex) regex language
> for interactive use, its mostly the highlighting system that needs them,
In my experience syntax highlighting is a nice fit for Parsing Expression
Grammars
And we should probably continue that discussion on
https://github.com/mawww/kakoune/issues/541
On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 06:32:08PM +, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> > * support lookaheads and lookbehinds, until I find a clean, alternative way
> >to express 'a double quote that is not preceeded by a pair number of
> >antislash' to match the closers of C strings (as an example of their
On 2 March 2016 at 18:26, Maxime Coste wrote:
> Yeah, I'd really like to get rid of boost, and possibly migrate to a
> lighter regex lib. The problem is that no currently available libs match
> the required feature set
Thanks for the list of issues. Perhaps we can work these in to a library.
>
On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 04:16:02PM +, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> On 2 March 2016 at 15:45, Maxime Coste wrote:
> > How does sam handles parallel grouping when we get multiple incompatible
> > changes
> > to the same range of text ?
>
> It panics.
>
> Incidentally, I notice that Kakoune uses
On 03/02/2016 11:22 AM, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> On 2 March 2016 at 16:06, Greg Reagle wrote:
>> Well sam has ISRE, but it lacks a nano/vi/emacs-like (full screen
>> interactive) TUI.
>
> I think the key to *interactive* structural regular expressions is
> that it must be possible to position
On 2 March 2016 at 16:06, Greg Reagle wrote:
> Well sam has ISRE, but it lacks a nano/vi/emacs-like (full screen
> interactive) TUI.
I think the key to *interactive* structural regular expressions is
that it must be possible to position oneself 'within' an expression.
Suppose you write x/re/, th
On 03/02/2016 10:45 AM, Maxime Coste wrote:
> How does sam handles parallel grouping when we get multiple incompatible
> changes
> to the same range of text ?
It looks like it refuses. Using `sam -d` from 9base, the following command:
x/echo/ {
c/AAA
c/BBB
}
produces error message "?changes no
On 2 March 2016 at 15:45, Maxime Coste wrote:
> How does sam handles parallel grouping when we get multiple incompatible
> changes
> to the same range of text ?
It panics.
Incidentally, I notice that Kakoune uses Boost's regular expressions,
which means that reverse searches are very inefficien
On 03/02/2016 07:42 AM, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> On 2 March 2016 at 10:40, Maxime Coste wrote:
>> That has been provided by Kakoune for a looong time
I have never heard of Kakoune. Thanks for informing me of it.
> Not as long as I've wanted it!
>
> (My first rant on this mailing list about '
On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 03:17:49PM +0100, Marc André Tanner wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 10:40:51AM +, Maxime Coste wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 10:14:48AM +, Raphaël Proust wrote:
> > > On 1 March 2016 at 17:12, Marc André Tanner wrote:
> > > > I think structural regexp will int
2016-03-02 15:17 GMT+01:00, Marc André Tanner :
> I want the possibility to store my most freqently used commands
> in a regular "favorites" file where they can be exexcuted from. I
> guess you could kind of hack something together with macros but that
> is not the same.
Like GNU sed's branches or
On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 10:40:51AM +, Maxime Coste wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 10:14:48AM +, Raphaël Proust wrote:
> > On 1 March 2016 at 17:12, Marc André Tanner wrote:
> > > I think structural regexp will integrate nicely with multiple selections.
> > >
> > > […]
> >
> > Yes! Inter
On 2 March 2016 at 10:40, Maxime Coste wrote:
> That has been provided by Kakoune for a looong time
Not as long as I've wanted it!
(My first rant on this mailing list about 'interactive structural
regular expressions' was in June 2011.)
But this may be what I've been looking for, thanks.
cls
On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 10:14:48AM +, Raphaël Proust wrote:
> On 1 March 2016 at 17:12, Marc André Tanner wrote:
> > I think structural regexp will integrate nicely with multiple selections.
> >
> > […]
>
> Yes! Interactive structural regexp would definitely be a Killer
> Feature™ IMO. I woul
On 1 March 2016 at 17:12, Marc André Tanner wrote:
> I think structural regexp will integrate nicely with multiple selections.
>
> […]
Yes! Interactive structural regexp would definitely be a Killer
Feature™ IMO. I would probably use an editor like that almost
exclusively.
On 1 March 2016 at 20
On 1 March 2016 at 20:35, Marc André Tanner wrote:
> As an example, swapping two words with
>
> ,x[a-zA-Z]+/{
> g/fred/ v/./ c/jim/
> g/jim/ v// c/fred/
> }
>
> which is mentioned in both the sam tutorial and the cheatsheet would
> no longer work.
That's true; I suppose it depends h
On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 06:12:32PM +, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> We agree for pretty much the same reasoning. (I'm not sure
> why you assumed otherwise.)
Misunderstanding on my part I guess. These are just limitations of
the regex(3) API but have no particular relevance for *structural*
regula
On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 05:41:00PM +, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> On 1 March 2016 at 17:12, Marc André Tanner wrote:
> > All commands of a group should operate on the original state of the text.
>
> Is that strictly necessary? I know that's how sam and acme behave, but
I haven't yet made my m
On 1 March 2016 at 17:44, Marc André Tanner wrote:
> Why do you think that?
For pretty much the reasons you list. Only support for NUL-terminated
strings, no support for passing successive blocks, poor performance
for repeated searches of particularly nondeterministic expressions,
and so on. We a
On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 04:46:19PM +, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> On 29 February 2016 at 18:51, Greg Reagle wrote:
> > Another approach would be to write a structural regexp library. Then
> > structural regexp's could be available to other programs.
>
> I've been thinking about this, actually
On 1 March 2016 at 17:12, Marc André Tanner wrote:
> All commands of a group should operate on the original state of the text.
Is that strictly necessary? I know that's how sam and acme behave, but
series of commands outside those {} blocks occur in sequence (not all
performing on the original te
On 1 March 2016 at 17:12, Marc André Tanner wrote:
> I think structural regexp will integrate nicely with multiple selections.
>
> Basically if you omit the command of a structural regexp the editor
> would switch to visual mode and add a selection for every match. If you
> are already in visual m
Hi,
I too like the concept of structural regular expressions and would like to
experiment with ways to integrate them into vis. That is the reason why
I didn't bother implementing an ex mode and instead referred to ssam(1)
in the README.
I think structural regexp will integrate nicely with multip
On 29 February 2016 at 18:51, Greg Reagle wrote:
> Another approach would be to write a structural regexp library. Then
> structural regexp's could be available to other programs.
I've been thinking about this, actually. What might be even better is
a regular expression library which just makes
On 02/26/2016 11:52 AM, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
Anyway, that could work. If we were to do that then I'd suggest we
first rip out all of sam's mesg and rasp code and work from there. The
code for the command line interface ought to stay.
Such a UI likely won't have some features one might really
On 26 February 2016 at 17:11, Greg Reagle wrote:
> On 02/26/2016 11:29 AM, Raphaël Proust wrote:
> I got it to work for me:
> […]
You are right, this change seems to work. I managed to reconstruct an
example that I am dissatisfied about.
The following works:
Edit ,x/test/{
i/<
a/>
}
But not the f
On 02/26/2016 11:29 AM, Raphaël Proust wrote:
I find the supposed
“transparency” of changes in a group is often buggy. I.e., when using
something like
,x/
I got it to work for me:
cat test | ssam ',x/start/ { i/\\texttt{/
a/}/
}'
Apparently there is no need to backslash-escape the braces since
On 26 February 2016 at 16:11, Greg Reagle wrote:
> Thanks for your thoughtful reply. What about a third option: use the core
> (editing and structural regexps) of sam (the part that runs with sam -d
> perhaps) and add a TUI. Do we have to re-use the undocumented binary
> protocol just because sa
On 26 February 2016 at 15:28, Greg Reagle wrote:
> I would like to be able to use sam from a console or ssh or computer without
> X11. This is already possible with `sam -d`, but I want to be able to see
> the contents displayed and automatically get updated when I make changes and
> to see the s
On 02/26/2016 10:56 AM, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
In any case, if there*were* an attempt, with more manpower, either to
reverse engineer the binary sam protocol or to implement a new editor,
then I'd be very happy to lend a hand.
Thanks for your thoughtful reply. What about a third option: use
You certainly aren't alone. I expect I'm the local expert on trying to
draw blood from that stone.
The problem, aside from my not having enough time to do any worthwhile
hobby programming at the moment, is that communication between sam and
samterm is an ad hoc binary protocol, with absolutely zer
I value the intelligence and wisdom of this community, so I'd like to
know what you think of this idea. Has it already been done? Are there
disadvantages that I don't realize? Thanks.
I recently learned the text editor sam[1] and I like it and I think that
Structural Regular Expressions are
36 matches
Mail list logo
