Thank you very much for all the feedback and interesting ideas, much food 
for thought! 

As for performance: a dedicated filter optimized to my task surely is easy 
to write. But I doubt that it would be faster for the kind of regex I have 
in mind than the more generic filter on top of s.replace() -- mainly, 
because no backtracking would be involved.

As for the macro trick: yes, that may be workable, but if I need to explain 
that to me a few weeks down the road I would never understand  (again). On 
thing my daytime job taught me is that no every hack that is cool is 
maintainable in the long run and this isn't desirable. I'm afraid that such 
a filter trick would effectively turn its own design into a 
non-general-purpose filter. I appreciate its cleverness, though.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWikiDev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywikidev.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywikidev/b56318d9-1bc1-4211-bf2a-fae8c10f2a1d%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to