Re: CVS script

[Russ McManus <mcmanr@eq.gs.com>]

Jim Blandy <jimb@red-bean.com> writes:

> > How would the guile version have looked if the following procedures where
> > available in some library?  BTW, I agree that stuff like this should exist
> > somewhere in the guile tree.
> 
> A library could have eliminated about a page, but not so much.

I guess we need to whip up a couple of additional procedures ;^)

> I like the bit about how a string supplied as a predicate
> automatically turns into a regexp.  That might be a good convention to
> use more widely, whenever one supplies a predicate on strings.  If the
> context says the predicate will be applied to filenames, it should be
> a glob pattern.  If the context just says it'll be applied to strings,
> it should be a full regexp.

Thanks.  As an interesting and only tangentially related aside, I
think it's great that guile gives the programmer the ability to
compile the regexp and then use it multiple times.  It's nice that you
don't have to rely on compiler optimizations to avoid multiple regexp
compilations, as one must in both elisp and perl.

I agree about the globbing vs regexp distinction.  Bud I didn't know
how to do globbing, so I punted.  Actually, I once tried to write a
program that transformed a glob specifications into posix regular
expressions, but halfway through my brain nearly exploded, so I
stopped.

Perl actually calls 'csh' sometimes to do globbing, I seem to
remember.

-russ



--
"Come to think of it, there are already a million monkeys on a million
 typewriters, and Usenet is NOTHING like Shakespeare."