On 28 March 2017 at 01:17, Simon D. <si...@acoeuro.com> wrote: > It would ease the use of regexps in Python
We don't really want to ease the use of regexps in Python - while they're an incredibly useful tool in a programmer's toolkit, they're so cryptic that they're almost inevitably a maintainability nightmare. Baking them directly into the language runtime also locks people in to a particular regex engine implementation, rather than being able to swap in a third party one if they choose to do so (as many folks currently do with the `regex` PyPI module). So it's appropriate to keep them as a string-based library level capability, and hence on a relatively level playing field with less comprehensive, but typically easier to maintain, options like string methods and third party text parsing libraries (such as https://pypi.python.org/pypi/parse for something close to the inverse of str.format) Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
