Ben Last wrote:
north_american_number_re = (RE().start
.literal('(').followed_by.__exactly(3).digits.then.__literal(')')
.then.one.literal("-").then.__exactly(3).digits
.then.one.dash.followed_by.__exactly(4).digits.then.end
In article ,
"Anders J. Munch" <2...@jmunch.dk> wrote:
> The problem with Perl-style regexp notation isn't so much that it's terse -
> it's
> that the syntax is irregular (sic) and doesn't follow modern principles for
> lexical structure in computer languages.
There seem to be three basic way
Ben Last writes:
> Good points. I wanted to find a syntax that allows comments as well as
> being fluent:
> RE()
> .any_number_of.digits # Recall that any_number_of includes zero
> .followed_by.an_optional.dot.then.at_least_one.digit # The dot is
> specifically optional
> # but we must have one
On 16 July 2013 20:48, wrote:
> From: "Anders J. Munch" <2...@jmunch.dk>
> Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2013 13:38:35 +0200
> Ben Last wrote:
>
>> north_american_number_re = (RE().start
>> .literal('(').followed_by.**exactly(3).digits.then.**literal(')')
>> .then.one.lit
Ben Last wrote:
north_american_number_re = (RE().start
.literal('(').followed_by.exactly(3).digits.then.literal(')')
.then.one.literal("-").then.exactly(3).digits
.then.one.dash.followed_by.exactly(4).digits.then.end
.as
On 15 July 2013 23:21, Ben Last wrote:
> Hi all
>
> I'd be interested in comments on a fluent regular expression generator I've
> been playing with (inspired by the frustrations of a friend of mine who's
> learning).
>
> The general use case is to be able to construct RE strings such as:
>
> r'^\(
