> Anything that comes out of the whole chomskian hierarchy stuff isn't going to look intuitive. Why not? Type-0 (recursively enumerable) languages are equivale

> Anything that comes out of the whole chomskian hierarchy stuff isn't going to look intuitive. Why not? Type-0 (recursively enumerable) languages are equivalent to Turing machines, and we've managed to invent some pretty good syntaxes for that. The main problem with regexes really is the syntax. Regular languages are a lot easier to understand (IMO) if you look at the left/right-linear grammars that define the same language as the regex. Regex syntax as a representation is very close to the FSA used for matching, and that's not necessarily the representation best suited for human consumption.