Alex Shinn scripsit:

> How about renaming it "submatch"?
>
>   submatch?
>   submatch-string
>   submatch-start
>   submatch-end

I think that's confusing if you aren't actually using submatches.  I
would favor either switching to "match" (and no, I don't think
name collision is so important in this case), or using the explicit
form "regexp-result", which describes what the object actually is.

--
We do, doodley do, doodley do, doodley do,        John Cowan <xxxxxx@ccil.org>
What we must, muddily must, muddily must, muddily must;
Muddily do, muddily do, muddily do, muddily do,    http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
Until we bust, bodily bust, bodily bust, bodily bust.  --Bokonon