Re: Improve `replace-regexp-in-string' ergonomics?

[Thierry Volpiatto]

Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:

> Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes:
>
>> BTW, the current limit on backrefs is just due to a lack of syntax for
>> higher-numbered backrefs, so it would be easy to lift this limit: it's
>> a small matter of choosing an appropriate syntax and then adjusting the
>> code that parses the regexps in regexp.c.
>
> A small matter indeed.  :-/
>
> But perhaps it would be worth doing -- arbitrary limitations like that
> goes against everything GNU stands for!

What about providing a simple anaphoric `and`?

    (let ((bar "bar"))
      (helm-aand bar
                 (replace-regexp-in-string "b" "f" it)
                 (replace-regexp-in-string "a" "o" it)
                 (replace-regexp-in-string "r" "o" it)))
    =>"foo"

And in addition it can be used for something else.

-- 
Thierry