[resent, 'cos I can't spell "perl6"] Richard Proctor wrote: :The whole (?x set of thingies is getting complicated... The list of what is :used at present (and in current suggestions is: : :Current Use in perl5 : :(?# comment :(?imsx flags :(?-imsx flags That's actually (?iogcmsx and (?-iogcmsx. ('o' is ignored; I'm not sure what if any effect 'g' and 'c' have, but it probably ain't pretty.) In theory, all letters should be reserved to map to future flags for the same reason. That's why we've been accumulating multi-punctuation signifiers, so it may be time to go for a new paradigm with more room for expansion: (+keyword) or (*keyword) would seem to be candidates. Hugo
- RFC 145 (alternate approach) David Corbin
- Re: RFC 145 (alternate approach) David Corbin
- Re: RFC 145 (alternate approach) Nathan Wiger
- Re: RFC 145 (alternate approach) David Corbin
- Re: RFC 145 (alternate approach) Richard Proctor
- Re: RFC 145 (alternate approach) Michael Maraist
- Re: what (?x) are in use? (was RF... Hugo
- Re: what (?x) are in use? (wa... Mark-Jason Dominus
- Re: RFC 145 (alternate approach) Richard Proctor
- Re: RFC 145 (alternate approach) David L. Nicol
- Re: RFC 145 (alternate approach) Eric Roode
- Re: RFC 145 (alternate approach) Nathan Wiger
- Re: RFC 145 (alternate approach) Richard Proctor
- Re: RFC 145 (alternate approach) Nathan Wiger
- Re: RFC 145 (alternate approach) Nathan Wiger
- Re: RFC 145 (alternate approach) Richard Proctor
- Re: RFC 145 (alternate approach) David Corbin