Luke Palmer wrote: > So there's no elegant way the new regexes support it? > That's a shame.
<max(/b.*a/, /b.*s/)> seems fairly elegant to me, with 2 caveats: First, we need assertions as part of the default library. I.e. we shouldn't need a C<use> for things like min and max. Second, we should eliminate as much of the syntactic noise as possible: <max b.*a b.*s> would be nice -- with parenthesis, or the like, needed only when things become ambiguous. I think, though am not sure, that having whitespace act as an arglist separator in assertions makes it cleaner. There are definitely strong counter-arguments. But I would like to minimize the clutter: and the baseline is that alternation requires only one character. Dave.
