On Mon, 28 Aug 2000 14:22:03 +1100 (EST), Damian Conway wrote:
> > I don't get it. What makes it so hard? If you see a "/" when you're
> > expecting an operator, or end of statement, then it's division. If you
> > were expecting an expression, it's a regex. Ain't it?
>
>Yes. And that's what makes it hard. Because somethimes you can be
>expecting *either* of those :-)
>
>Consider the statement:
>
> wash / my / gimsox;
>
>Division or pattern match?
Ah I see. Well, requiring m// doesn't really help, in the general case.
foo -2
subtraction or function call with parameter -2?
--
Bart.
- Re: RFC 135 (v2) Require explici... Casey R. Tweten
- Re: RFC 135 (v2) Require explici... Nathan Wiger
- Re: RFC 135 (v2) Require explici... John Porter
- Re: RFC 135 (v2) Require explici... Bart Lateur
- Re: RFC 135 (v2) Require explici... John Porter
- New match and subst replacements... Nathan Wiger
- Re: New match and subst replacem... Randy J. Ray
- Re: New match and subst replacem... Nathan Wiger
- Re: New match and subst replacem... Bart Lateur
- Re: RFC 135 (v2) Require explici... Damian Conway
- Re: RFC 135 (v2) Require explici... Bart Lateur
- Re: RFC 135 (v2) Require explicit m on matche... Peter Scott
- Re: RFC 135 (v2) Require explicit m on matches, e... Damian Conway
- Re: RFC 135 (v2) Require explicit m on matches, even with... Damian Conway
- RE: RFC 135 (v2) Require explicit m on matches, even with ... Fisher Mark
