Regular Expressions in Smalltalk?
ned at squeakland.org
Sun Jun 20 15:23:46 UTC 2004
On Sunday 20 June 2004 3:43 am, Russell Penney wrote:
> I have looked at using the regex package but noticed by looking at other
> code that it isn't really used in a lot of places. So I umm'd and errr'd
> and decided to leave it alone for the moment.
> So is it more efficient to use regex? Or is the ease of use/maintaining
> better with regex? Inquiring minds wish to know :)
Both. There is a lot of random string manipulation code in Squeak that would
be *much* simpler with regex usage.
> If it turns out that regex is better/faster/stronger than cobbling together
> a parser, I would vote that Squeak had it included as standard (SMACC for
> complex stuff and regex for simpler stuff)
I'd love to see it included. However, the one that Andy Greenberg wrote and
that I've been maintaining on SqueakMap requires a plugin, and so people with
old VMs would have to update (the RePlugin is distributed with all the VMs
now, as far as I know).
I should separate the pieces so that people without VMMaker could load the
There are also some all-Smalltalk regex packages available; I haven't tried
them or compared them against the plugin-based one (which is quite fast and
complete, and comes with a number of tests).
More information about the Squeak-dev