In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Bart Lateur writes: :On Fri, 29 Sep 2000 00:29:31 +0100, Hugo wrote: :>:I originally had thought of providing a separate, dedicated regex :>:modifier, just for the match prefix, but I don't think too many people :>:need this that desperately. You can easily build a working application :>:with just the '/z' modifier. If you can't, you're in over your head, :>:anyway. ;-) :> :>I don't understand this paragraph. : :I'll have to rework this into plain English. Thanks, I understand it now. Since the functionality is provided for by /z, I'd suggest replacing that paragraph with an example showing how you can use it to detect a prefix match; I think that involves rewriting your /p example something like: if (/^$pat$/z) { print "found a complete match"; } elsif (defined pos) { print "found a prefix match"; } else { print "not a match"; } :p.s. I often wondered why pos() is not just a special variable. That :would make more sense, I think, from a user POV, than making it a :special function. I think because it is associated with a variable: ($a, $b) = qw/ banana baobab /; $a =~ /a/gc, $b =~ /b/gc; print pos($a), pos($b); pos($a)++, pos($b)++; print pos($a), pos($b); Perhaps it would have been helpful if 'pos' and 'pos()' were different, similar to eof: have pos() refer to $_, and bare pos refer to the last match. This would particularly have helped when the target of the match was not a variable ("test" =~ $re) or when it was a complex or expensive value ($self->slowload->{attr}). However, given the confusion this duality of eof has engendered over the years it is probably just as well not to. Hugo
