Josiah Carlson wrote: > re2 can be used as a limited structural parser. This makes the re > module useful for more things than it is currently. The question of it > being in the standard library, however, I think should be made based on > the criteria used previously (whatever they were). In general, if developers can readily agree that a functionality should be added (i.e. it is "obvious" for some reason), it is added right away. Otherwise, a PEP should be written, and reviewed by the community. In the specific case, Chris Ottrey submitted a link to his project to the SF patches tracker, asking for inclusion. I felt that there is likely no immediate agreement, and suggested he asks on python-dev, and writes a PEP. If this kind of functionality would fall on immediate rejection for some reason, even writing the PEP might be pointless. If the functionality is generally considered useful, a PEP can be written, and then implemented according to the PEP procedures (i.e. collect feedback, discuss alternatives, ask for BDFL pronouncement). I personally think that the proposed functionality should *not* live in a separate module, but somehow be integrated into SRE. Whether or not the proposed functionality is useful in the first place, I don't know. I never have nested named groups in my regular expressions. Regards, Martin
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4