On Sat, Apr 16, 2005 at 02:42:25AM -0700, Ashley Winters wrote: : I never liked character sets. They introduced yet another exception to : the parsing rules, and it irked me. If it weren't for the need to : optimize character sets, I'd prefer to be Pythonized into using @{'a' : .. 'z'} : : If I read the Apocalypses correctly, I'm allowed to use this bizzare construct: : : $foo ~~ /@{< [ ] { } < > : ++ $ . ? / +| +& ?| ?& >}/ : : to match some of my favorite punctuations, right?
Not unless you backwhack that internal > there. : It allows : multi-character alternatives as well as the single-character ones, so : it seems preferable to me (assuming it could be optimized happily). I will happily assume that all sorts of things could be optimized away if only someone will generate an endless supply of convex tuits. Assuming someone doesn't invent such a tuit factory, and that the @ matcher is smart about caching unchanged arrays, you might actually get much better performance out of: @myfavoritepunctuations = < [ ] { } < \> : ++ $ . ? / +| +& ?| ?& >; $foo ~~ /@myfavoritepunctuations/; It's arguably a lot more readable too. Larry