On Mon, 27 Apr 2009 15:12:59 -0700, Walter Bright wrote:
> Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> I have been convinced. I will modify splitter to do (4), i.e., prepend
>> or append an empty element if there's a leading, respectively trailing,
>> separator. Thanks to all for destroying me :o).
>
> Looks
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
I have been convinced. I will modify splitter to do (4), i.e., prepend
or append an empty element if there's a leading, respectively trailing,
separator. Thanks to all for destroying me :o).
Looks like I must concede, too .
On Mon, 27 Apr 2009, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> I have been convinced. I will modify splitter to do (4), i.e., prepend or
> append an empty element if there's a leading, respectively trailing,
> separator. Thanks to all for destroying me :o).
>
> Actually, Brad, since it was your idea, I sugges
downs wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
bearophile wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu:
Splitter does what Perl's split does: 2.
Perl has to die. This is Python:
This answer is wrong for a number of reasons. First comes the fallacy
that if Perl "has to die", everything Perl did was wrong. Second come
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> bearophile wrote:
>> Andrei Alexandrescu:
>>> Splitter does what Perl's split does: 2.
>>
>> Perl has to die. This is Python:
>
> This answer is wrong for a number of reasons. First comes the fallacy
> that if Perl "has to die", everything Perl did was wrong. Second co
