On Mon, Jun 04, 2001 at 04:20:12PM -0400, Uri Guttman wrote: > that doesn't address larry's point which is very important. No, I was replying to David, so I thought I'd address his point instead. Conventional, I know. :) > the regex compiler needs to be able to generate the equvilent of the > above directly into perl ops. Yes, of course. It's easy enough to do if, for instance, you have a Perl op called "exact", "plus", etc. ... -- "Everything's working, try again in half an hour."-chorus.net tech support
- Re: Stacks, registers, and bytecode. (Oh, my!) Larry Wall
- Re: Stacks, registers, and bytecode. (Oh, my!) Jarkko Hietaniemi
- Re: Stacks, registers, and bytecode. (Oh, my!) David L. Nicol
- Re: Stacks, registers, and bytecode. (Oh, my!) Simon Cozens
- Re: Stacks, registers, and bytecode. (Oh, my!) Dan Sugalski
- Re: Stacks, registers, and bytecode. (Oh, my!) Simon Cozens
- Re: Stacks, registers, and bytecode. (Oh, my!) Jarkko Hietaniemi
- Re: Stacks, registers, and bytecode. (Oh, my!) Dan Sugalski
- Re: Stacks, registers, and bytecode. (Oh, my!) David L. Nicol
- Re: Stacks, registers, and bytecode. (Oh, my!) Uri Guttman
- Re: Stacks, registers, and bytecode. (Oh, my!) Simon Cozens
- Re: Stacks, registers, and bytecode. (Oh, my!) Dan Sugalski
- Re: Stacks, registers, and bytecode. (Oh, my!) Dan Sugalski
- Re: Stacks, registers, and bytecode. (Oh, my!) Uri Guttman
- Re: Stacks, registers, and bytecode. (Oh, my!) Nick Ing-Simmons
- Re: Stacks, registers, and bytecode. (Oh, my!) Dan Sugalski
- Re: Stacks, registers, and bytecode. (Oh, my!) Larry Wall
- Re: Stacks, registers, and bytecode. (Oh, my!) Jarkko Hietaniemi
- Re: Stacks, registers, and bytecode. (Oh, my!) Bryan C . Warnock
- Re: Stacks, registers, and bytecode. (Oh, my!) Larry Wall