> /pat/i m:i/pat/ or /<?i:pat>/ or even m<?i:pat> ???
Why lose the modifier-following-final-delimiter
syntax? Is this to avoid a parsing issue, or
because it's linguistically odd to have a modifier
at the end?
> /^pat$/m /^^pat$$/
What's the mnemonic here? It feels the wrong
way round -- like a single ^ or $ should match
at newlines, double ^ or $ should only match
at start/end string.
Ah. The newline matches between the ^^ or $$.
That works.
Then there's the PID issue. Hmm. How to save $$
(it is nice for one liners)?
Sorry if this is a dumb suggestion, but could you have
just one assertion, say ^$, that alternates matching
just before and just after a newline?
> /./s /<any>/ or /<.>/ ???
I'd expect . to match newlines by default. For a . that
didn't match newlines, I'd expect to need to use [^\n].
> space <sp> (or \h for "horizontal"?)
Can one quote a substring of a regex? In a later part you
say that \Q...\E is going away, so it seems not. It would be
nice to say something like:
/foo bar baz 'qux waldo' emerson/
and have the space between qux and waldo be literal.
Similar arguments apply more broadly so that one
could escape the usual meaning of metacharacters etc.
> \Lstring\E \L<string>
> \Ustring\E \U<string>
Maybe, if I wasn't too far off with the quote mark
suggestion above, then \L'string' would be more
natural.
> (?#...) {"..."} :-)
Will plain # comments work in p6 regexen?
> (?:...) <:...>
> (?=...) <before: ...>
> (?!...) <!before: ...>
> (?<=...) <after: ...>
> (?<!...) <!after: ...>
> (?>...) <grab: ...>
Hmm. So <> are clustering just like ().
One difference is that () always capture whereas <>
only do so sometimes. Oh, and {} can too.
() are no longer used for clever stuff, <> are instead.
And {}.
Hmm. Time for bed.
--
ralph
