Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from October 2009
2009/10/6 karl williamson <public@khwilliamson.com>: > Jan Dubois wrote: >> >> On Mon, 05 Oct 2009, demerphq wrote: >>> >>> And this is why we really really want \w and \s and \d to match the >>> traditional thing, even if this means requiring people add something >>> to older scripts to support the legacy behaviour. You cant tell what a >>> pattern does by looking at it, you have to know the internal bit flags >>> of the string involved. >> >> Just to be sure: \b will continue to be defined based on \w and \W >> and change its behavior as well, right? I'm only asking because \b is >> not explicitly listed in this discussion. >> >> Cheers, >> -Jan >> >> >> > I had considered for a little while of upgrading \b to the newer Unicode > Word_Break property, but decided against it. Thus unless someone else were > gung-ho to do that, \b would continue to be defined in terms of \w. But > your question prompted me to look at the code, and it appears to me, Yves, > that something would have to be done to address this. Thanks for pointing > it out. Yes I am aware of this. The BOUND regops handler (and relatives) need to be fixed. It will probably addressed along with /\s/ and stuff. cheers Yves -- perl -Mre=debug -e "/just|another|perl|hacker/"Thread Previous | Thread Next