Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from December 2010
On Sun, Dec 05, 2010 at 10:01:03PM -0700, karl williamson wrote: > > Another wrinkle. In looking through the code I identified several more > possible things that might ought to be restricted to ASCII by /a. Does > anyone have an opinion on these?: > > \h > > \v > > \R > > \X I have an opinion. I hardly see any code using \h, \v, \R and \X, and if it's used, it's seldomly *mis*used to mean just the ASCII subset of their meaning. They are new enough to never had a pre-5.6 meaning which is still present in books and documentation. There has never been an opportunity for people to make mistakes as with \d, \w and \s. I see /a as a way to correct (or revert) the changes introduced in 5.6. As there's no need to revert \h, \v, \R, I rather not see their meaning change under /a. As for \X, I think /\X/a having match only ASCII characters is rather pointless. For the same reason, I don't think /\C/a should match a different set of characters than /\C/ does. Deep down, I really only care about \d, \D, \w, and \W. [[:posix:]] I see so infrequently used, that while I think it's nice to be fixed, it doesn't bother me that much. And \s matching outside of the ASCII range usually doesn't lead to potential problems. AbigailThread Previous | Thread Next