This list has gone a little quiet...
Hugo wrote:
> I like this too. I'd suggest /t should mean a) return a scalar of
> the number of matches and b) don't set any special variables. Then
> /t without /g would return 0 or 1, but be faster since no extra
> information need be captured (except internally for (.)\1 type
> matching - compile time checks could determine if these are needed,
> though (?{..}) and (??{..}) patterns would require disabling of
> that optimisation). /tg would give a scalar count of the total
> number of matches. \G would retain its meaning.
>
> Any which way, implementation should be fairly straightforward,
> though ensuring that optimisations occurred precisely when they
> are safe would probably involve a few bug-chasing cycles.
I propose adding this note. His preference for the working of
/t and /g seems the most appropriate. Unless I here any further
discussion I propose moving this RFC to frozen this week.
Richard
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
