On 20 October 2012 22:16, Mark H Weaver m...@netris.org wrote:
Honestly, this question makes me wonder if the proposed 'regexp-split'
is too complicated. If you want to trim whitespace, how about using
'string-trim-right' or 'string-trim-both' before splitting? It seems
more likely to do
On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 10:16:49AM -0400, Mark H Weaver wrote:
Sorry, that last example is wrong of course, but both of these examples
raise an interesting question about how #:limit and #:trim should
interact. To my mind, the top example above is correct. I think the
last result should be
On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 04:20:09PM +0800, Daniel Hartwig wrote:
Yes. Keep it simple. Operations like trim-whitespace and
drop-empty-strings-from-the-result (mentioned in the previous
discussion) are so easy to do outside of regexp-split, why complicate
the semantics?
So easy, but so
Hi Chris,
Chris K. Jester-Young cky...@gmail.com writes:
On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 05:57:11PM -0400, Mark H Weaver wrote:
Beyond matters of taste, I don't like this because it makes bugs less
likely to be caught. Suppose 'limit' is a computed value, normally
expected to be positive. Code that
I wrote:
(regexp-split + foo bar baz #:limit 3 #:trim 'both)
= (foo bar baz)
(regexp-split + foo bar baz #:limit 2 #:trim 'both)
= (foo bar)
Sorry, that last example is wrong of course, but both of these examples
raise an interesting question about how
On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 05:57:11PM -0400, Mark H Weaver wrote:
FWIW, I agree with Daniel. I dislike the complicated semantics of this
'limit' argument, which combines into a single number two different
concepts:
First, I want to thank both Daniel and Mark for their feedback. I'm
sorry I
Daniel Hartwig mand...@gmail.com writes:
On 19 September 2012 03:59, Chris K. Jester-Young cky...@gmail.com wrote:
(define* (regexp-split pat str #:optional (limit 0))
[…]
(reverse (if (zero? limit)
(drop-while string-null? final)
final
Please
Hi Chris,
Chris K. Jester-Young cky...@gmail.com skribis:
I'm currently implementing regexp-split for Guile, which provides a
Perl-style split function (including correctly implementing the limit
parameter), minus the special awk-style whitespace handling (that is
used with a pattern
Hi Chris,
I have been following your thread about regexp-split. I do have some
thoughts about this to make the interface more versalite.
So, basically, the Perl split's limit is used this way:
1. Positive limit: Return this many fields at most:
(regexp-split : foo:bar:baz:qux: 3)
option of these three implementations) into ice-9?
On Mon, 2012-09-17 at 10:01 -0400, Chris K. Jester-Young wrote:
Hi there,
I'm currently implementing regexp-split for Guile, which provides a
Perl-style split function (including correctly implementing the limit
parameter), minus the special awk
On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 09:06:55AM +0200, Sjoerd van Leent Privé wrote:
It might just be me, but would it not be more sensible for scheme to
just perform the opposite. Return the same amount of fields at most,
but starting from the end, thus:
(regexp-split : foo:bar:baz:qux: -3)
= (foo:bar
On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 08:59:33PM +0800, nalaginrut wrote:
Anyway, if there're so many people like this nice thing, why not we add
it (at any option of these three implementations) into ice-9?
Oh noes! This is where the bikeshedding begins. ;-)
Seriously, I do think having a regexp-split in
Here's a revised version, implementing Thien-Thi Nguyen's comments. I
added line breaks for the cons and the bottom if (I feel that the
top if is still simple enough to keep on the same line).
Cheers,
Chris.
* * *
(define (regexp-split-fold match prev)
(if
Hi there,
I'm currently implementing regexp-split for Guile, which provides a
Perl-style split function (including correctly implementing the limit
parameter), minus the special awk-style whitespace handling (that is
used with a pattern of , as opposed to / /, with Perl's split).
Attached
() Chris K. Jester-Young cky...@gmail.com
() Mon, 17 Sep 2012 10:01:33 -0400
(define (string-empty? str)
(zero? (string-length str)))
You can use ‘string-null?’ instead.
(define* (regexp-split pat str #:optional (limit 0))
(let* ((result (fold-matches pat str '(0)
On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 09:32:14PM +0200, Thien-Thi Nguyen wrote:
(define (string-empty? str)
(zero? (string-length str)))
You can use ‘string-null?’ instead.
Ah, nice! Thanks for the pointer.
Style nit: i find it easier to read ‘if’ expressions w/ the condition,
then and else
16 matches
Mail list logo
