Re: [ELPA] New package: xr

[Stefan Monnier]

>  one-or-more 1+ +
>  zero-or-more 0+ *
>  zero-or-one optional opt ?

I'm definitely in favor of using the standard * + and ?

>  any char in

I think I prefer `char` or `in`.

>  line-start bol
>  line-end eol
>  string-start buffer-start bos bot
>  string-end buffer-end eos eot
>  word-start bow
>  word-end eow

I like the boX/eoX nomenclature.

The main benefit of RX is to make the structure more visible, and the
main downside is to make regexp more verbose, so I think short
identifiers are preferable.

>  sequence seq and :

I'm strongly opposed to `and` because that should mean the
conjunction/intersection of two regexps (i.e. a string matches it only
if it matches both sub-regexps) rather than the sequential concatenation.
[ lex.el supports such intersections.  ]


        Stefan