3 ms·

No True Scotsman. For years I struggled to grok the difference between regular expression and parsing. The conversations I would hear about the topic always le

No True Scotsman. For years I struggled to grok the difference between regular expression and parsing. The conversations I would hear about the topic always left me feeling there must be some interesting meat to the difference...and so I would go read up on it only to find myself with the same problem a few months down the line. The only difference is layers. Enough regular expression becomes a parser. A slim enough compiler is just a templating engine. Insisting it's a deep, dark magic and not the advanced application of `str.replace` does the industry a disservice.

senkora 4y ago
Regular expressions can only parse regular languages. More powerful parser techniques can parse context-free languages or even recursively enumerable languages. These are fundamentally distinct levels of complexity. It is fundamentally impossible to correctly parse e.g. HTML with regular expressions. See: https://stackoverflow.com/a/1732454 https://stackoverflow.com/a/1732454
- rob74 4y ago
  Ah yes, the classic StackOverflow answer. If that doesn't teach you not to parse HTML with regex, nothing will...
serjeem 4y ago
> Insisting it's a deep, dark magic and not the advanced application of `str.replace` does the industry a disservice. Respectfully, this perspective contradicts the computer science underlying our work--there are in fact different categories of string "languages" that can be parsed using different technologies, and regular expressions are not enough for most "languages". See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chomsky_hierarchy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chomsky_hierarchy for the different categories of languages and the required tech to parse them. I consider CS theory to be about the deepest and darkest magic I get to use on a daily basis :P. > The only difference is layers. Enough regular expression becomes a parser. A slim enough compiler is just a templating engine. You can't add enough layers of standard regex to parse, say, C++ or even a tree of matching parenthesis. You need a different tech like CFGs. Hope this helps improve the grokking! The "interesting meat" here actually points at some really deep, fundamental CS theory that's really worth knowing.
- musingsole 4y ago
  "regular expression" != "regular language" I appreciate the academic frameworks that have led to the development of systems, however as a working engineer, ignoring where the rubber meets the road is my entire complaint.
mattgreenrocks 4y ago
Parsing is way more interesting than regexes. Look up recursive descent parsers to get an idea of where to start. They are conceptually simple and great for getting an overview of how, exactly, you can write a recognizer for different sets of text.

senkora 4y ago

Regular expressions can only parse regular languages. More powerful parser techniques can parse context-free languages or even recursively enumerable languages. These are fundamentally distinct levels of complexity. It is fundamentally impossible to correctly parse e.g. HTML with regular expressions. See: https://stackoverflow.com/a/1732454 https://stackoverflow.com/a/1732454

rob74 4y ago
Ah yes, the classic StackOverflow answer. If that doesn't teach you not to parse HTML with regex, nothing will...

serjeem 4y ago

> Insisting it's a deep, dark magic and not the advanced application of `str.replace` does the industry a disservice. Respectfully, this perspective contradicts the computer science underlying our work--there are in fact different categories of string "languages" that can be parsed using different technologies, and regular expressions are not enough for most "languages". See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chomsky_hierarchy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chomsky_hierarchy for the different categories of languages and the required tech to parse them. I consider CS theory to be about the deepest and darkest magic I get to use on a daily basis :P. > The only difference is layers. Enough regular expression becomes a parser. A slim enough compiler is just a templating engine. You can't add enough layers of standard regex to parse, say, C++ or even a tree of matching parenthesis. You need a different tech like CFGs. Hope this helps improve the grokking! The "interesting meat" here actually points at some really deep, fundamental CS theory that's really worth knowing.

musingsole 4y ago
"regular expression" != "regular language" I appreciate the academic frameworks that have led to the development of systems, however as a working engineer, ignoring where the rubber meets the road is my entire complaint.

mattgreenrocks 4y ago

Parsing is way more interesting than regexes. Look up recursive descent parsers to get an idea of where to start. They are conceptually simple and great for getting an overview of how, exactly, you can write a recognizer for different sets of text.