[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: utf-16le vs utf-16-le
From: |
Stefan Monnier |
Subject: |
Re: utf-16le vs utf-16-le |
Date: |
Tue, 15 Apr 2008 11:35:30 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux) |
>>>> You mean, it's almost exactly the same, except it's completely
>>>> different? Then I agree,
>>
>>> "Start/end of line" and "Start of buffer/communication" is not
>>> "completely different". Likewise, "\\`" and "^" are not "completely
>>> different" regular expressions.
>>
>> But by EOL we don't mean "^" or "$", but "\n": this *is* completely
>> different from "\\`".
> I fail to see anything close to a coherent argument here, and it is
> probably not relevant to the issue at hand, anyway. So we might as well
> stop.
Look at the src/regex.c code (or any other regex manipulation code);
compare the code needed for "^" and "$" to the code needed for "\n".
"\n" is trivial, just like any other char (which is the key here:
EOL-conversion is just a way to convert the \n to a byte sequence and
vice-versa, which is why it integrates well with EOL-conversion),
whereas ^ and $ require special handling because they have to look
before or after the matched text.
Try (replace-regexp-in-string "\\>" "toto" "a b c") to get a feeling for
the kinds of problems you can get with regexp elements that look outside
of the matched text.
Stefan
- Re: utf-16le vs utf-16-le, (continued)
- Re: utf-16le vs utf-16-le, Eli Zaretskii, 2008/04/16
- Re: utf-16le vs utf-16-le, Stefan Monnier, 2008/04/16
- Re: utf-16le vs utf-16-le, Stefan Monnier, 2008/04/14
- Re: utf-16le vs utf-16-le, David Kastrup, 2008/04/14
- Re: utf-16le vs utf-16-le, Stefan Monnier, 2008/04/14
- Re: utf-16le vs utf-16-le, David Kastrup, 2008/04/14
- Re: utf-16le vs utf-16-le, Stefan Monnier, 2008/04/14
- Re: utf-16le vs utf-16-le, David Kastrup, 2008/04/15
- Re: utf-16le vs utf-16-le,
Stefan Monnier <=
- Re: utf-16le vs utf-16-le, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2008/04/14
Re: utf-16le vs utf-16-le, Kenichi Handa, 2008/04/14
Re: utf-16le vs utf-16-le, tomas, 2008/04/14
- Re: utf-16le vs utf-16-le, Eli Zaretskii, 2008/04/14
- Re: utf-16le vs utf-16-le, tomas, 2008/04/15
- Re: utf-16le vs utf-16-le, Juri Linkov, 2008/04/15
- Re: utf-16le vs utf-16-le, Eli Zaretskii, 2008/04/15
- Re: utf-16le vs utf-16-le, Jason Rumney, 2008/04/16
- Re: utf-16le vs utf-16-le, Stefan Monnier, 2008/04/16