On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 3:40 PM, John Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Alex Shinn scripsit: > > > > Chicken regexp's historically weren't tied to PCRE, and > > provided a fairly minimal feature set to accomodate all the > > backends equally. It now always uses PCRE, and you could > > get at the named subpatterns with pcre_get_named_substring() > > if you returned the match object, but personally I don't > > think it should be bound too strongly to PCRE. > > I think the contrary: since we are committed to allowing access to the > extended regex features of PCRE (which helps portability: no more random > lossage because I use an extension that your regex package doesn't have), > we should also provide access to the API of PCRE. This seems to me much > more Chicken-y.
Hm, I think not: committing to PCRE ensures all use the same regexp flavor, not more. If we need more API at all, it should go into: http://chicken.wiki.br/regex-extras cheers, felix _______________________________________________ Chicken-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
