On 16/08/12 12:31, Erik Christiansen wrote:
On 16.08.12 03:15, Tony Mechelynck wrote:
Oh, regular expressions work quite nicely, but AFAICT each of the
Unix programs which uses them has an almost, but not quite, identical
grammar for them. So they look familiar, but at some unexpected times
the same regexp does just very slightly different things in different
programs: IOW you have to check each time how regexps works for the
software you are using _now_.
Sadly yes, if we let that happen. One way to avoid that irritation is to
avoid using awk AND sed AND perl, etc. Sticking to one of the two major
classes, Extended REs (EREs), or the obsolete Basic REs (BREs), is a
ripper of a start, I find. (e.g. use only egrep or "grep -E", and only
awk. There are then no differences.)
Interestingly:
$ man 7 regex # seems to think we are moving forward:
»Regular expressions ("RE"s), as defined in POSIX.2, come in two forms: modern
REs (roughly those of egrep; POSIX.2 calls these "extended" REs) and obsolete
REs (roughly those of ed(1); POSIX.2 "basic" REs). Obsolete REs mostly
exist for backward compatibility in some old programs; they will be discussed
at the end. POSIX.2 leaves some aspects of RE syntax and semantics open;
"(!)" marks decisions on these aspects that may not be fully portable to
other POSIX.2 implementations.«
Vim's bewildering variety of regex flavours must have its varied uses.
The "\v" variation is the only one worth using, I submit, because it
is near as dammit POSIX ERE. (At least close enough that I don't
remember any big surprises.) Now our text searcher, text processor, and
editor all use EREs. :-))
I beg to differ. This would mean always using "very magic" regexps. I
always leave the 'magic' setting at its default (magic) and never change
it in a pattern, because that is what is assumed at most places in the
Vim help where patterns are discussed.
Until now, I haven't felt the need for other than very simple regexps in
programs other than Vim — let's say ^ $ \< \> and literal-character
matching (maybe also . * \. \* \/ and \\), and these seem to work in
most of what I need, namely less (including the pager for man) and, I
think, grep. I'll be prudent and try to find the right documentation
before I use more complex pattern matching outside Vim (whose help still
amazes me every day by its completeness, now that I have "domesticated"
the various ways of searching it, as detailed in the helphelp.txt
helpfile, which didn't exist when I came to Vim a few years ago).
But why are EREs better than BREs? Because they greatly reduce the
painful obfuscation of backslash snowstorms which occur in BREs,
allowing us to read them without counting on fingers and toes every time
we hit backslashes.
I tried building Vim with a POSIX regex library once. The resulting
behaviour was a dream, except for the :help. It broke. :-(
Erik
P.S. OK, I can't remember what regex flavour Expect uses, but it is
nearly a decade since I last used it.
Best regards,
Tony.
--
WOMAN: I didn't know we had a king. I thought we were an autonomous
collective.
DENNIS: You're fooling yourself. We're living in a dictatorship. A
self-perpetuating autocracy in which the working classes--
WOMAN: Oh there you go, bringing class into it again.
DENNIS: That's what it's all about if only people would--
The Quest for the Holy Grail (Monty
Python)
--
You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
