develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from August 2010

Re: Any opposition still to the idea of syntax indicating default regex modifiers?

Thread Previous | Thread Next
From:
Eirik Berg Hanssen
Date:
August 10, 2010 23:06
Subject:
Re: Any opposition still to the idea of syntax indicating default regex modifiers?
Message ID:
AANLkTi=njtFNg08RnPxvqok1-1ViXyT6QHuQ3ZrXDX6C@mail.gmail.com
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 11:32 PM, karl williamson
<public@khwilliamson.com>wrote:

> If we're going to do this, I'd like to do it now before the new regex
> modifiers go in.
>
> Aristotle withdrew his opposition and became a supporter after he
> understood what the proposal really was.  Sorry for being unclear.
>
> If there's no opposition, we need to settle on what is the syntax is. Ben
> originally proposed (?~  I thought (?.  was better because the tilde can be
> too easily confused with a hyphen, (?-  which is also legal right after the
> question mark.
>
> Another option is to make it a two character sequence, the first one is a
> tilde, say, and I'm not sure what the second one should be.  This would
> allow future expansion so that some other 2nd char could mean something
> else.  Mostly people wouldn't type this, it would be inserted by the regex
> compiler.
>


  If this is happening, I think I prefer (??...-...:<re>).

  Like (?...-...:<re>), but different, just like (??{...}) is like (?{...}),
but different. :)


Eirik

Thread Previous | Thread Next


nntp.perl.org: Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at ask@perl.org | Group listing | About