PROPOSAL: Multiline strings
jeremy.manson at gmail.com
Sun Mar 1 09:53:35 PST 2009
The plus side of the escaped String approach is that you can then use
any language, not just regexps. Also, escaped Strings might be a plus
for security purposes.
Also, I'm not a big fan of the idea of embedding the
domain-specific-language-du-jour into my programming language. I see
it as a slippery slope. It's regexps today, but it's XML tomorrow
(I'm looking at you, Scala).
On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 1:16 AM, Adrian Kuhn <akuhn at gmx.ch> wrote:
> On 01.03.2009, at 09:58, Jeremy Manson wrote:
>> Frankly, to me, the big win would actually not be multiline literals,
>> but would be escaped String literals. I'm sick of writing all of my
>> regexps with twice as many \ characters as they need.
> In this case, why not allow regexps to be written literally in source
> code? As is done in many other languages. Although, this change would
> couple the regexp API with the language. But maybe here, the benefit
> might be worth the costs.
More information about the coin-dev