Re: "regular expressions" need a new name

Has Apocalypse 5 left you with futureshock? Did Synopsis 5 leave you with the feeling that you are now just as confused as before, only more intensely so?

It was no shock, but a very pleasant surprise.

Perl's so called "regular expressions" have long since left the original meaning of that term behind. It's really ridicilous that one of the most powerfull aspects of perl should be named after the most restricted, simple grammars you can imagine.

Who cares about the name? Well, apparently you do, but my point is that it's just a name. The power that the technique gives is important, the name is just an identifier.

It's high time we give this thing a new name.

No, it's not.

I propose keeping the short form "regexp"

Funny - Larry proposed to get rid of "regexp" and use "regex" instead.

p.s. be the first to ++ this article and make me a friar!

I always answer upvote requests with a downvote.

- Yes, I reinvent wheels.
- Spam: Visit eurotraQ.

Comment on Re: "regular expressions" need a new name

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: "regular expressions" need a new name by Aristotle (Chancellor) on Jul 15, 2002 at 14:43 UTC
I mostly agree with your points, though I wouldn't quite take so harsh a stance. The upvote request irked me too; although it simply cancelled out the ++ for me, so I voted nothing. I do think the point is a good one to raise, because names can be important - even though I do not think we should change the name "regex". It is just too ingrained for a successful attempt to change it and the meaning too long ago lost on the "general public" for a change to have any meaning. Personally I like the change in Camel 3rd Ed to "pattern matching". That is both an old term as well as an accurate one. I'll try to stick to that. Makeshifts last the longest.	[reply]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re^2: "regular expressions" need a new name
by Aristotle (Chancellor) on Jul 15, 2002 at 14:43 UTC

I mostly agree with your points, though I wouldn't quite take so harsh a stance.

The upvote request irked me too; although it simply cancelled out the ++ for me, so I voted nothing.

I do think the point is a good one to raise, because names can be important - even though I do not think we should change the name "regex". It is just too ingrained for a successful attempt to change it and the meaning too long ago lost on the "general public" for a change to have any meaning.

Makeshifts last the longest.

[reply]