Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from February 2011
>> Here are the ones I can think of at the moment: >> >> /w to change the meaning of \b to Unicode's word boundary algorithm. >> /k to change /i to mean compatible decomposition > Please don't use /k. Having /k means '(?k:)' becoming valid, and that > will interfere with Regexp::Common, which uses '(?k:)'. /p started out > as /k, and it was changed to /p as to not interfere with Regexp::Common. The first thing that comes to mind is: do you have an alternate suggestion? As for Regexp::Common, UGH! I have rather mixed feelings about that. It's not even a module in the core Perl distribution, and yet its use of a syntax reserved to the core blocks progress in that direction. How many others like this exist? On the other hand, adding /k would suddenly change the behavior of existing programs through no fault of their owners. As frustrating though this may me, it seems a real blocker, and I fear you're right. But it is a very natural thing to use. We can't really try for /N:k and /N:d because those don't embed cleanly as (?N:k:stuff). Plus it's a problem for N:c and N:kc, since :k and :c mean separate things and having :kc mean something else is pretty dodgy. I wonder how to squeeze NF:D NF:C NF:KD NF:KC in. I do *not* think it's time to go to :NF<KD> or such. Hm, verbs? (*NFKD) That seems extensible. Not sure I care for it though. Seems important enough for a /switch. --tomThread Previous | Thread Next