RE: [External] : Re: Ugly regexps

[Drew Adams]

To add to what some others have said -

Is RX usable as part of our interactive use of regexps?
If so, great (assuming the UI for that is well done).

If not, I'd say that's another reason that at least
some of us might not bother with (or aren't in the
habit of using) RX.

I think that interactive use of regexps is the most
important for Emacs - more important than what is
used for Elisp.  And if that means (as it does now)
Elisp regexps, then that's what people will and should
learn: Elisp regexp syntax.

Of course, for interactive use, we already remove the
need for double backslashing etc.  But the regexp
dialect that's available interactively is (so far) the
Elisp one, not some other.  I think that alone may
explain limited use of RX in code.  (Just a thought.)