From philipp at marek.priv.at  Mon Oct  1 07:10:50 2012
From: philipp at marek.priv.at (Philipp Marek)
Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2012 09:10:50 +0200
Subject: [cl-ppcre-devel] debugging of RE matching
In-Reply-To: <CAD3YvRVxYFBbSVTCr3uO7YenT0Erxc2koiBGSWZor3u=-tXSdA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <2895c7b70e5acf9306c75993b3501dc3.squirrel@webmail.hitco.org>
	<CABj0bw+gr7iVcabMKRuFYNwADMfRpNmCjN6ngQ5Atn0T80etjA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAD3YvRVxYFBbSVTCr3uO7YenT0Erxc2koiBGSWZor3u=-tXSdA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <992c5d5331a9016f1ff3e152eeb21bc9.squirrel@webmail.hitco.org>

Hello Edi,
hello Hans,


thank you very much for your feedback.
I've done nearly all of the requested changes, and wrote some
documentation, too.

The points that are still open are
 * I can't get the (with-trace-output) macro working (see last commit on
   my branch) - does (eval-when) stop working as expected when it's
   not in a top-level form?
 * In practical use I've seen a few errors - wrong indizes, and
   some other error. Will try to fix, but help is appreciated, of course.


>> your change seems useful, but I wonder why you added an extra lambda
>> layer instead of doing the binding in the function returned by
>> create-scanner-aux match-fn.  Is there a reason for that?
Is this question about the

  (let ((scanner (create-scanner-aux match-fn

line? If it is, then I put the (lambda) below to get a minimal diff.

If the question is "why is that not in (create-matcher-aux)" - because
*debug-results* and *ppcre-debug-depth* have to be bound _outside_ the
create-matcher-aux calls, and not re-bound within.

Or am I misunderstanding your question, still? Then please clarify.


Thank you very much!

Regards,

Phil





From hans.huebner at gmail.com  Mon Oct  1 08:18:35 2012
From: hans.huebner at gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Hans_H=FCbner?=)
Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2012 10:18:35 +0200
Subject: [cl-ppcre-devel] debugging of RE matching
In-Reply-To: <992c5d5331a9016f1ff3e152eeb21bc9.squirrel@webmail.hitco.org>
References: <2895c7b70e5acf9306c75993b3501dc3.squirrel@webmail.hitco.org>
	<CABj0bw+gr7iVcabMKRuFYNwADMfRpNmCjN6ngQ5Atn0T80etjA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAD3YvRVxYFBbSVTCr3uO7YenT0Erxc2koiBGSWZor3u=-tXSdA@mail.gmail.com>
	<992c5d5331a9016f1ff3e152eeb21bc9.squirrel@webmail.hitco.org>
Message-ID: <CABj0bwJ==5pGr1YuqOp9AnZmW4CaAXwAkzDoqWP-OmD73QEXYQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 9:10 AM, Philipp Marek <philipp at marek.priv.at> wrote:
> Is this question about the
>
>   (let ((scanner (create-scanner-aux match-fn
>
> line? If it is, then I put the (lambda) below to get a minimal diff.

Minimal diff is not a goal.  You can accompany your patch submission
with a comment that there are whitespace changes so that reviewers
remember to use "diff -w".

-Hans



From philipp at marek.priv.at  Mon Oct  1 16:29:26 2012
From: philipp at marek.priv.at (Philipp Marek)
Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2012 18:29:26 +0200
Subject: [cl-ppcre-devel] debugging of RE matching
In-Reply-To: <CABj0bwJ==5pGr1YuqOp9AnZmW4CaAXwAkzDoqWP-OmD73QEXYQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <2895c7b70e5acf9306c75993b3501dc3.squirrel@webmail.hitco.org>
	<CABj0bw+gr7iVcabMKRuFYNwADMfRpNmCjN6ngQ5Atn0T80etjA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAD3YvRVxYFBbSVTCr3uO7YenT0Erxc2koiBGSWZor3u=-tXSdA@mail.gmail.com>
	<992c5d5331a9016f1ff3e152eeb21bc9.squirrel@webmail.hitco.org>
	<CABj0bwJ==5pGr1YuqOp9AnZmW4CaAXwAkzDoqWP-OmD73QEXYQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <b34ef873020c717e96c0b1d46faafabc.squirrel@webmail.hitco.org>

Hello Hans,

thanks for your answer.


>> Is this question about the
>>
>>   (let ((scanner (create-scanner-aux match-fn
>>
>> line? If it is, then I put the (lambda) below to get a minimal diff.
>
> Minimal diff is not a goal.
Well, it was for me, to show the (minimal) difference.

>  You can accompany your patch submission
> with a comment that there are whitespace changes so that reviewers
> remember to use "diff -w".
Yes, but who reads commit messages? ;)


I tried to do as you suggested, folding the LAMBDA back to avoid the extra LET; please
take a look at the last commit of my branch, because that gives me a

    The variable CL-PPCRE::END-STRING-OFFSET is unbound.

error, although this special variable should be bound as before -- in the LET*.

This is with SBCL 1.0.58.0.debian, in case that makes a difference.



Regards,

Phil