Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from August 2010
* Ben Morrow <ben@morrow.me.uk> [2010-08-10 00:45]: > The 'expansion' of (?~i:) as a (?i-xsm:) expression changes, > but the semantics implied do not. Ahh. So Karl’s reply that “the defaults can never change” was a refutation of my point about how the same regex would imply different things across different versions of Perl if we had `(?~:)` notation. Whereas I understood Karl to be saying that the set of flags implied by it must never change. Under that premise (which I think should be explicitly documented for `(?~:)` if it does get added) I agree, it’s a good idea with no discernible downside. (Wow, in turns out most of this thread was superfluous…) Regards, -- Aristotle Pagaltzis // <http://plasmasturm.org/>Thread Previous | Thread Next