GNU bug report logs -
#6390
Should not regexp-quote quote newline?
Previous Next
Full log
View this message in rfc822 format
On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 5:00 AM, MON KEY <monkey <at> sandpframing.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 9:28 AM, Lennart Borgman
> <lennart.borgman <at> gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I guess you mean "this is not what I thought you proposed".
>
> I meant what I wrote.
So you think you understood what I proposed better than me? That is
very strange.
>>> Regardless, the function name `print-escape-newlines' and its
>>> documentation SAY NOTHING ABOUT ESCAPING TAB CHARACTERS!!!!!
>>
>> Yes, it is a terribly bad name for the feature it provides.
>
> It is reasonably named, it says what it does.
> Prob. it is only terrible should one want \t escaped as well.
Why do you print-escape-newlines is a good name for something that
controls both escaping of newlines and form-feeds?
>> As I understand it the purpose of it is make all the
>> print/prin1/format/pp functions make the written representation of a
>> string easier to handle in certain cases.
>
> Understand whatever you want - this isn't what it
> `print-escape-newlines' _does_.
>
> You might find it exceedingly informative and interesting to look over
> Emacs sources from pre GNU days when coming to grips with the C
> vagaries inflicted on the Emacs read eval print loop.
Thanks, but no.
> Indeed, the transgression upon our poor (e)lisp REPL by the cult of the
> curly braced are many, and in the absence of a more maleable readtable
> and reader syntax she has been afforded little with which retaliate
> against the mighty C, his `\' escape syntax, and the hordes of bastard
> regexps his syntax has spawned.
Using the same character for read escapes and regexp backslash makes
things difficult, yes.
And lead to confusing discussions like this one.
>> but I can't think of a single reason why it should not be good to
>> handel TAB the same way in those cases.
>
> It is a mistake to extend your lack of foresight on other users of
> this feature.
>
>> Can you?
>
> Yes, I believe I can. So what?
It seemed important to you so I thought you might want to tell.
>> Don't you think getting a printed representation of this kind is useful.
>
> No, it is absolutely not useful for `print-escape-newlines' to do this.
>
> Yes, I might find it useful as a dedicated function under another
> name. Though I don't think it would be difficult to implement if/when
> needed, and it certainly doesn't need to be piggy-backed onto the
> existing feature.
I would be glad if you gave some arguments.
>> To clarify things I pointed to what Andreas wrote.
>
> Nonsense. This was your attempt to deflect my objection to one of your
> ill conceived proposals to another persons objection to yet another of
> your ill conceived proposals. IOW recursive nonsense...
Please don't waste our time! If you have something to say then do it!
> Which FWIW, is my principal objection to this and other such similar
> bug reports of yours. They often amount to nothing more than veiled
> feature requests which if presented/exposed/discussed as such would be
> received poorly.
I think it would be better if you asked me if you do not understand
them. There is no reason wasting other peoples time too. Mail me
privately.
> sender's subject line of such `bug report's are phrased in the
> form of a question which routinely match the pattern:
>
> "Should not the <FEATURE-X> .*?"
I am sorry, but you are misunderstanding. We also use the bug database
for wishes and suggestions so they do not get lost.
This bug report was last modified 13 years and 317 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.