Ben Finney wrote: > Steven D'Aprano <steve at pearwood.info> writes: > >> Ben Finney wrote: >>> "M.-A. Lemburg" <mal at egenix.com> writes: >>>> No, you tell them: "If you want Unicode 6 semantics, use regex, if >>>> you're fine with Unicode 2.0/3.0 semantics, use re". >>> What do we say, then, to those who are unaware of the different >>> semantics between those versions of Unicode, and want regular expression >>> to “just work” in Python? >>> >>> To which document can we direct them to understand what semantics they >>> want? >> Presumably, like all modules, both the re and the regex module will >> have their own individual pages in the library reference. > > My question is directed more to M-A Lemburg's passage above, and its > implicit assumption that the user understand the changes between > “Unicode 2.0/3.0 semantics” and “Unicode 6 semantics”, and how their own > needs relate to those semantics. > > For programmers who know they want to follow Unicode conventions in > Python, but don't know the distinction M-A Lemburg is drawing, to which > document does he recommend we direct them? I can only repeat my answer: the docs for the new regex module should include a discussion of the differences. If that requires summarising the differences that M-A Lemburg refers to, then so be it. > “The Unicode specification document in its various versions” isn't a > feasible answer. Presumably the Unicode spec will be the canonical source, but I agree that we should not expect people to read that in order to make a decision between re and regex. -- Steven
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