On Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:08:25 -0500, Joseph F. Ryan wrote:
> Peter Haworth wrote:
>
> >On Thu, 05 Dec 2002 15:17:57 -0500, Joseph F. Ryan wrote:
> >
> >>Again, C<< "STRING".split(' ') >> is different than
> >> C<< "STRING".split(/\s+/) >>. The latter will add an empty element to the
> >>beginning of the string if there is leading whitespace, which is not the
> >>behaivor <<>> will have (if it acts like qw(), at any rate.)
> >
> >I hate this special case. Why is there no way of specifying the removal
> >of leading empty elements with any other separator string?
>
> Given that strings and regular expressions are different types of objects,
> maybe the "single whitespace" rule could be extended to any single
> character delimeter
That's still an unchangeable special case. In some circumstances, I might
want leading empty fields when I specify space as the separator, and in
others I might want them stripped with any random separator string or
regex. There needs to be a way to explicitly specify whether leading blanks
are required.
--
Peter Haworth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"I think that was lobotomy rather than trepanation wasn't it? Important to
understand the difference if you're considering trepanning yourself at home"
-- Robin Houston
