Antoine Pitrou [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
See also #3825.
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue2636
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Jeffrey C. Jacobs [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Thanks for weighing in Mark! Actually, your point is valid and quite
fair, though I would not assume that Item 3 would be included just
because Item 2 isn't. I will do my best to develop both, but I do not
make the final decision as to
Mark Summerfield [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
[snip]
It seems to me that both using a special prefix or adding an option are
adding a lot of baggage and will increase the learning curve.
The nice thing about (3) (even without slicing) is that it seems a v.
natural extension. But (2)
Mark Summerfield [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
[snip]
13) Implement a grouptuples(...) method as per Mark Summerfield's
suggest on 2008-05-28 09:38. grouptuples would take the same filtering
parameters as the other group* functions, and would return a list of 3-
tuples (unless only 1
Jeffrey C. Jacobs [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Well, it's time for another update on my progress...
Some good news first: Atomic Grouping is now completed, tested and
documented, and as stated above, is classified as issue2636-01 and
related patches. Secondly, with caveats listed
Changes by Jeffrey C. Jacobs [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file10052/issue2636-09.patch
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue2636
___
Changes by Jeffrey C. Jacobs [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file10467/issue2636.diff
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue2636
___
Changes by Jeffrey C. Jacobs [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file10428/issue2636-05-only.diff
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue2636
___
Changes by Jeffrey C. Jacobs [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file10468/issue2636-05.diff
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue2636
___
Changes by Jeffrey C. Jacobs [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file10469/issue2636-07.diff
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue2636
___
Changes by Jeffrey C. Jacobs [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file10470/issue2636-07-only.diff
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue2636
___
Jeffrey C. Jacobs [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Sorry, as I stated in the last post, I generated the patches then realized
that I was missing the documentation for Item 2, so I have updated the
issue2636-02.patch file and am attaching that separately until the next
release of the patch
Changes by Jeffrey C. Jacobs [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file10467/issue2636.diff
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue2636
___
Changes by Jeffrey C. Jacobs [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file10427/issue2636.diff
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue2636
___
Changes by Jeffrey C. Jacobs [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file10468/issue2636-05.diff
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue2636
___
Changes by Jeffrey C. Jacobs [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file10429/issue2636-05.diff
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue2636
___
Mark Summerfield [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
AFAIK if you have a regex with named capture groups there is no direct
way to relate them to the capture group numbers.
You could do (untested; Python 3 syntax):
d = {v: k for k, v in match.groupdict()}
for i in
Jeffrey C. Jacobs [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Mark scribbled:
One possible solution would be a grouptuples() function that returned
a tuple of 3-tuples (index, name, captured_text) with the name being
None for unnamed groups.
Hmm. Well, that's not a bad idea at all IMHO and would,
Changes by Jeffrey C. Jacobs [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file10428/issue2636-05-only.diff
__
Tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue2636
__
___
Jeffrey C. Jacobs [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
I am finally making progress again, after a month of changing my
patches from my local svn repository to bazaar hosted on launchpad.net,
as stated in my last update. I also have more or less finished the
probably easiest item, #5, so I
Changes by Jeffrey C. Jacobs [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file10429/issue2636-05.diff
__
Tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue2636
__
___
Changes by Jeffrey C. Jacobs [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file10056/issue2636-05.patch
__
Tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue2636
__
___
Jeffrey C. Jacobs [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
I am making my changes in a Bazaar branch hosted on Launchpad. It took
me quite a while to get things set up more-or-less logically but there
they are and I'm currently trying to re-apply my local changes up to
today into the various
Jeffrey C. Jacobs [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Thank you and Merci Antoine!
That is a good point. It is clearly specific to the compiler whether a
switch-case will be turned into a series of conditional branches or
simply creating an internal jump table with lookup. And it is true
Jim Jewett [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
These features are to bring the Regexp code closer in line with Perl 5.10
Why 5.1 instead of 5.8 or at least 5.6? Is it just a scope-creep issue?
as well as add a few python-specific
because this also adds to the scope.
2) Make named
Amaury Forgeot d'Arc [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
These features are to bring the Regexp code closer in line
with Perl 5.10
Why 5.1 instead of 5.8 or at least 5.6? Is it just a scope-creep issue?
5.10.0 comes after 5.8 and is the latest version (2007/12/18)!
Yes it is
Jeffrey C. Jacobs [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Thanks Jim for your thoughts!
Armaury has already explained about Perl 5.10.0. I suppose it's like
Macintosh version numbering, since Mac Tiger went from version 10.4.9 to
10.4.10 and 10.4.11 a few years ago. Maybe we should call Python
Jim Jewett [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Python 2.6 isn't the last, but Guido has said that there won't be a 2.10.
Match object is a C-struct with python binding
and I'm not exactly sure how to add either feature to it
I may be misunderstanding -- isn't this just a matter of writing
Changes by Russ Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
--
nosy: +rsc
__
Tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue2636
__
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
Jeffrey C. Jacobs [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
This simple patch adds (?P#...)-style comment support.
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file10056/issue2636-05.patch
__
Tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue2636
Jeffrey C. Jacobs [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
I am very sorry to report (at least for me) that as of this moment, item
9), although not yet complete, is stable and able to pass all the
existing python regexp tests. Because these tests are timed, I am using
the timings from the first
New submission from Jeffrey C. Jacobs [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I am working on adding features to the current Regexp implementation,
which is now set to 2.2.2. These features are to bring the Regexp code
closer in line with Perl 5.10 as well as add a few python-specific
niceties and potential
Changes by A.M. Kuchling [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
--
components: +Regular Expressions -Library (Lib)
__
Tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue2636
__
___
33 matches
Mail list logo
