Hi Nicolas, I have tested this a bit, and it does pretty much what I want. Just to be sure: We will also support expressions with braces, right?
- Carsten On Nov 25, 2013, at 6:14 PM, Nicolas Goaziou <n.goaz...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > > For the record `org-match-substring-regexp' is a variation on: > > "\\(\\S-\\)\\([_^]\\)\\(\\(?:\\*\\|[-+]?[^-+*!@#$%^_ > \t\r\n,:\"?<>~;./{}=()]+\\)\\)\\)" > > I think it is a bit convoluted and therefore difficult to predict. For > example, as recent bug report showed, you may tend to interpret > a_b[fn:1] as > > a_{b}[fn:1] > > but, in fact, it is equivalent to > > a_{b[fn}:1] > > Of course, we can prevent this by forbidding "[" and "]" in the last > part of the regexp. But I wonder if there's something better to do. > > The idea behind this regexp is that we should be able to write simple > sub/superscript, including numbers and entities, without requiring curly > braces (see `org-use-sub-superscripts' docstring for details). Maybe > something like the following could be an interesting alternative: > > > "\\(\\S-\\)\\([_^]\\)\\(\\*\\|[+-]?\\(?:\\w\\|[0-9.,\\]\\)*\\(\\w\\|[0-9]\\)\\)" > > That is, without braces, either an asterisk or any combination of word, > number, dot, comma and backslash characters, which may start with either > a plus or a minus sign but cannot end with either a dot or a comma. > > I find it arguably more predictable (no inverted class). Also, we "gain" > the following: > > a^3.14. <=> a^{3.14}. > > At the moment, a^3.14. <=> a^{3}.14. > > What do you think? > > > Regards, > > -- > Nicolas Goaziou >