I had started to do this as you recc.(with Vector), but I'm curious as to
why you say not to initialize until I have 2 + elements? For efficiency?
I agree it'll save a little bit of time, but I can't imagine it would be a
huge slowdown. But I very well may be wrong, and I'll try to do it in the
most efficient manner anyway.
Ian
On Wed, 28 Mar 2001, Michael McCallum wrote:
> The simple solution is to have a vector for each paren. At the moment only the last
>paren is
> saved as the matches are put into an array.
>
> Just dont initialise the vector until you have 2 + elements.
>
> The workaround is to use a reluctant match and then call it repeatedly using the
>match( string,
> index ) method which is supposed to be internal but i dont think it is.
>
> Michael
>
> On 27 Mar 2001, at 11:01, Ian Swett wrote:
>
> > I would like to be able to gather all the indices of matches inside
> > repeated closures, instead of just retrieving one of them.
> >
> > A simple example:
> > matching regexp (abc)* against zyabcabcabc will only allow the start/end
> > locations of one of the three abc sequences to be retrieved. I would like
> > to retrieve all of them. Obviously this is an excessively simple example,
> > but it conveys the idea.
> >
> > Is there a relatively simple way to do this already? Or a workaround I
> > could use that wouldn't be very ugly or slow?
> >
> > Is there enough demand to add this capability? It seems like it should be
> > relatively easy to do. I could start working on it if others want it.
> >
> > Ian
> >
> >
>
>
>
