* Armin Rigo , 2017-01-28, 12:44:
The theoretical kind of regexp is about giving a "yes/no" answer, whereas the
concrete "re" or "regexp" modules gives a match object, which lets you ask for
the subgroups' location, for example. Strange at it may seem, I am not aware
of a way to do that using t
On Sat, 28 Jan 2017 12:07:05 -0500
Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Jan 28, 2017, at 03:43 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>
> >I still think it could be a good candidate for a first "bundled"
> >module, where we don't migrate it fully into the CPython development
> >process, but *do* officially bless it and pro
Why not declare re deprecated and remove it in Python 4? I am pretty sure
everyone wants to keep re in all 3.x releases, but that support need not
extend beyond. So Py4 would have no battery for re, but it would (should!)
be common knowledge that regex was the go-to module for general-purpose
patte
On 29 January 2017 at 20:30, Steve Holden wrote:
> Why not declare re deprecated and remove it in Python 4? I am pretty sure
> everyone wants to keep re in all 3.x releases, but that support need not
> extend beyond. So Py4 would have no battery for re, but it would (should!)
> be common knowledge
On 29.01.17 22:30, Steve Holden wrote:
Why not declare re deprecated and remove it in Python 4? I am pretty
sure everyone wants to keep re in all 3.x releases, but that support
need not extend beyond. So Py4 would have no battery for re, but it
would (should!) be common knowledge that regex was t
On 29.01.17 12:18, Jakub Wilk wrote:
* Armin Rigo , 2017-01-28, 12:44:
The theoretical kind of regexp is about giving a "yes/no" answer,
whereas the concrete "re" or "regexp" modules gives a match object,
which lets you ask for the subgroups' location, for example. Strange
at it may seem, I am n
Armin Rigo wrote:
The theoretical kind of regexp is about giving a "yes/no" answer,
whereas the concrete "re" or "regexp" modules gives a match object,
which lets you ask for the subgroups' location, for example.
Another issue is that the theoretical engine has no notion of
greedy/non-greedy ma
On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 4:09 AM, Ivan Levkivskyi
wrote:
>
>
> Concerning list/set/dict comprehensions, I am much more in favor of making
> comprehensions simply equivalent to for-loops (more or less like you
> proposed using yield from). The only reason to introduce auxiliary function
> scope was
