Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from October 2009
>
> For \s, it's a big unusable at present, and changing the definition
> will create more confusion and breakage than gain.
>
> Changing \s, \w, and \d from their traditional meanings sounds dangerous.
>
> My opinion.
>
> What is the real gain here? That some applications will magically
> start supporting additional unicode sequences and "just work"? That
> people can type fewer regexp operands to get "new"-style behaviour?
> How many people want this?
>
> I suppose if it is "all non-English writers" my opinion might be
> out-numbered. :-)
>
> Cheers,
> mark
>
I'm in agreement with mark. If you want unicode semantics for characters
that can be used in identifiers then you have \p{ID_Start} and
\p{ID_Continue}
\w shoud be its historical meaning
John
______________________________________________
This email has been scanned by Netintelligence
http://www.netintelligence.com/email
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next