Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from August 2010
Abigail wrote: > On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 03:42:27PM +0100, Zefram wrote: >> Abigail wrote: >>> written code that actually scans for (?xism:) constructs and modifies >>> them. Such code would break if (?xism:) is going to be replaced with (?~:). >> Without (?^:) it's liable to break whenever new flags are added. > > Only if you're actually going to change the meaning of modifiers. I parsed > for /\(\?([a-z]*)(-?)([a-z]*):/i, knowing that if modifiers were to be added, > it would be ASCII letters. And then inspect and mangle $1 & $3. > >>> '(?si-xm:)' tells me exactly what's >>> enabled, and what's disabled, regardless of the Perl version. >> No, it doesn't. It doesn't tell you whether the /p flag is enabled. > > It does. It tells me that pattern following the : neither enables, nor > disables /p. Whether /p is in effect is inherited from the enclosing > pattern. > > I can take '(?si-xm:PATTERN)', and know what it does by itself. Regardless > of Perl version. If someone comes to me and ask what '(?si-xm:PATTERN)' > means, I can explain it to him. If he comes with '(?~-xm:PATTERN)', I'll > have to reply "well, that depends on the version of Perl you're running". > > > Abigail > The defaults will not change from version to version. Any new flag will default to the old behavior, so it's not correct that the meaning depends on the version.Thread Previous | Thread Next