From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5-pre1 (2020-06-20) on ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1 Path: eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!aioe.org!5WHqCw2XxjHb2npjM9GYbw.user.gioia.aioe.org.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Easiest way to use redular expressions? Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2021 12:20:08 +0100 Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server Message-ID: References: <87ft3facfz.fsf@nightsong.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 5WHqCw2XxjHb2npjM9GYbw.user.gioia.aioe.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.6.0 X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.9.2 Content-Language: en-US Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:61036 List-Id: On 2021-01-05 11:46, Paul Rubin wrote: > "Dmitry A. Kazakov" writes: >> If somebody is adamant to use patterns, then SNOBOL would be a better >> choice. It is cleaner, intuitive and more powerful than regular >> expressions. > > OMG, SNOBOL was fun, but these days, look at Parsec-style parser > combinators. The question was about pattern matching vs parsing. Proper parsing is clearly preferable to pattern fly-over. > Parsec is a Haskell library but there are similar things > in other languages. Huh, a table driven recursive descent parser with expression inserts is all anybody ever needed. I am using this approach for decades implementing dozens of crazy domain-specific languages and other idiotisms like JSON. Nothing is better, IMO. And the *best*: recursive descent is not declarative, not FP, not juggling standing on the head, it is as imperative and procedural as it goes. -- Regards, Dmitry A. Kazakov http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de