OK, I think this discussion should be closed.
Richard should add a section to RFC110 that discusses the
$count = () = m/PAT/g;
locution and its advantages and disadvantages compared to his
proposal, duly taking into account the many valuable comments that
have been made.
Thanks to everyone who participated in the discussion.
- Re: RFC 110 (v3) counting matches Tom Christiansen
- Re: RFC 110 (v3) counting matches Bart Lateur
- Re: RFC 110 (v3) counting matches Tom Christiansen
- Re: RFC 110 (v3) counting matches Bart Lateur
- Re: RFC 110 (v3) counting matches Mark-Jason Dominus
- Re: RFC 110 (v3) counting matches Tom Christiansen
- Re: RFC 110 (v3) counting matches Tom Christiansen
- Re: RFC 110 (v3) counting matches Tom Christiansen
- Re: RFC 110 (v3) counting matches Nathan Wiger
- Re: RFC 110 (v3) counting matches Tom Christiansen
- Re: RFC 110 (v3) counting matches Mark-Jason Dominus
- Re: RFC 110 (v3) counting matches Richard Proctor
- Re: RFC 110 (v3) counting matches Philip Newton
- Re: RFC 110 (v3) counting matches Mark-Jason Dominus
- Re: RFC 110 (v3) counting matches Nathan Wiger
- Re: RFC 110 (v3) counting matches Tom Christiansen
- Re: RFC 110 (v3) counting matches Chaim Frenkel
- Re: RFC 110 (v3) counting matches Jonathan Scott Duff
- Re: RFC 110 (v3) counting matches Joe McMahon
- Re: RFC 110 (v3) counting matches Jonathan Scott Duff
- Re: RFC 110 (v3) counting matches Damien Neil
