Re: Is there any way to have a string literal that is read "raw"

[Sean O'Rourke]

"Richard M. Stallman" <address@hidden> writes:
> I would not dream of changing something as fundamental as string
> syntax for something as specific as filename handling, even if it were
> meant to be used on the GNU system.

Some sort of literal string syntax would also be very useful for
regular expressions, since the Emacs syntax tends to be
backslash-heavy.  I'm sure it has been discussed before, but a quick
Google search didn't turn up anything in the emacs-devel archives.

/s