[Python-ideas] New pattern-matching library (was: str.split with multiple individual split characters)
Guido van Rossum
guido at python.org
Wed Mar 2 00:22:14 CET 2011
On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 2:50 PM, geremy condra <debatem1 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 1:23 PM, Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 12:25 PM, Tal Einat <taleinat at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 9:53 PM, geremy condra <debatem1 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> It's unfortunate that there isn't a good way to do this kind of
>>>> long-range work within the auspices of Python. I can imagine a number
>>>> of projects like this that fail to attract interest due to low
>>>> perceived chances of success and a dearth of community feedback.
>>> Once a good library had a solid foundation, it could plug itself into some
>>> widely used Python programs and gain publicity and support from there,
>>> before pushing for inclusion in the stdlib.
>>> A good example is Django's URL mapping, which currently uses regexps. I
>>> think it would be possible to get Django to support an alternate pattern
>>> matching method, in addition to regexps, since this would make learning
>>> Django easier for developers who don't grok regexps.
>> Ah, but geremy is complaining about work that cannot be done as a
>> library, e.g. syntax changes. This is because I suggested a better
>> approach to matching would probably require syntax changes. I don't
>> have an answer -- it may be easier to create a whole new language and
>> experiment with matching syntax than it is to get a PEP approved for a
>> matching syntax extension to Python... That's just how it goes for
>> mature languages. Try getting new syntax added to C++, Java or
> Erm... this actually isn't what I was talking about at all. I was
> basically just saying that I think it would be good if Python had
> better tools to bring attention to issues that might be considered for
> inclusion if a better way could be found.
Ok, sorry. But that sounds so general as to be devoid of meaning. Can
you clarify your wish with a few examples?
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
More information about the Python-ideas