3 ms·

I stand corrected on that - I was responding to the headline and did not appreciate that Rust has had library support beforehand. (That said, having regex aroun

I stand corrected on that - I was responding to the headline and did not appreciate that Rust has had library support beforehand. (That said, having regex around in different standard vs. crate options is not necessarily the ideal). It's good to have a focus and I agree that Rust is all about performance and stability for a system language. I haven't seen Raku regex performance benchmarked, but I would be surprised if it beats perl or Rust. I wouldn't say that Raku is a good choice where speed is the most important consideration since it is a scripting language that runs on a VM with GC. Nevertheless the language syntax includes many features (hyper operators, lazy evaluation to name two) that make it amenable to performance optimisation.

masklinn 1y ago
> That said, having regex around in different standard vs. crate options is not necessarily the ideal What 1: both regex and fancy-regex are crates. Regex is under the rust-lang umbrella but it’s not part of the stdlib. What 2: having different options is the point of third partly libraries, why would you have a third party library which is the exact same thing as the standard library?
- librasteve 1y ago
  so Rust has no regex in the standard library, basic/fast regex under the rust-lang umbrella in a crate and fancy-regex is a 3rd party crate not having different options is the point of (batteries included) standard libraries ;-)
  - burntsushi 1y ago
    We (I am on libs-api in addition to authoring the regex crate) specifically eschewed a batteries included standard library. The fact that `regex` was its own thing was the best thing that ever happened to it. It let me iterate on its API independent of the standard library.
    - librasteve 1y ago
      fair enough - there are pros and cons, but in many situations that _can_ lead to balkanisation of the language Raku has specifically chosen the "kitchen sink" option with a massive amount of cool stuff included ... I would argue that have both regex and Grammars tightly in the core language syntax is a big win in that case (and the default choice of Str as graphemes) with Rust and Raku that's mitigated by crate and zef respectively - both reliable, unified package manager ecosystems

masklinn 1y ago

> That said, having regex around in different standard vs. crate options is not necessarily the ideal What 1: both regex and fancy-regex are crates. Regex is under the rust-lang umbrella but it’s not part of the stdlib. What 2: having different options is the point of third partly libraries, why would you have a third party library which is the exact same thing as the standard library?

librasteve 1y ago
so Rust has no regex in the standard library, basic/fast regex under the rust-lang umbrella in a crate and fancy-regex is a 3rd party crate not having different options is the point of (batteries included) standard libraries ;-)
- burntsushi 1y ago
  We (I am on libs-api in addition to authoring the regex crate) specifically eschewed a batteries included standard library. The fact that `regex` was its own thing was the best thing that ever happened to it. It let me iterate on its API independent of the standard library.
  - librasteve 1y ago
    fair enough - there are pros and cons, but in many situations that _can_ lead to balkanisation of the language Raku has specifically chosen the "kitchen sink" option with a massive amount of cool stuff included ... I would argue that have both regex and Grammars tightly in the core language syntax is a big win in that case (and the default choice of Str as graphemes) with Rust and Raku that's mitigated by crate and zef respectively - both reliable, unified package manager ecosystems