Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from September 2011
On Wed, 21 Sep 2011, Father Chrysostomos via RT wrote: > Come to think of it, we already have your version of (*THEN), as > (?>...). I know I’m just repeating what you said by that. But it has > just occurred to me that it belongs at the top of this list. > > So your ^A(B(*THEN)C) translates into ^A((?>B)C). Sure ... but Perl has never shied away from having "more than one way to do it" has it? :-) You will be please to hear that Jeff Friedl, who has only just discovered (*THEN) and friends - I guess he's been doing other stuff - agrees with your and Perl's interpretation. He even pointed out that adding a non-matching alternation would change the behaviour. I haven't had any responses from the mailing list I asked. So on a sample of one third party, it looks like my intuition is invalid. At a practical level, I am not sure it is feasible to change PCRE to behave like Perl, so I may have to settle for documenting the difference. There are precedents (i.e. other differences). Thanks for picking this up and having this discussion. Regards, Philip -- Philip HazelThread Previous | Thread Next