On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 01:09:40AM +0100, Ruud H.G. van Tol wrote:
> 's/$/foo/' becomes 's//foo/'
> >>>
> >>> Uh, no, because is still a zero width assertion. :-)
> >>
> >> That's why I chose it. It is not at the end-of-string?
> >
> > Because ".*" matches "", // would be true at
> > every p
On Mon, Nov 21, 2005 at 11:19:48PM +0100, Ruud H.G. van Tol wrote:
> Patrick R. Michaud:
>
> >> 's/$/foo/' becomes 's//foo/'
> >>
> >
> > Uh, no, because is still a zero width assertion. :-)
>
> That's why I chose it. It is not at the end-of-string?
Because ".*" matches "", // would be true
On Mon, Nov 21, 2005 at 07:57:59PM +0100, Ruud H.G. van Tol wrote:
>
> There is a "[[:alpha:][:digit:]" and a "[[:alpha:][:digit]]" on the
> A5-page.
Now fixed.
> > Besides, you have to be able to distinguish
> > s/^/foo/ from s/$/foo/.
>
> 's/$/foo/' becomes 's//foo/'
>
Uh, no, because is s
On Mon, Nov 21, 2005 at 12:08:08PM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 21, 2005 at 07:57:59PM +0100, Ruud H.G. van Tol wrote:
> : There is a "[[:alpha:][:digit:]" and a "[[:alpha:][:digit]]" on the
> : A5-page.
>
> Hmm, well, thanks--I went to fix it and I see Patrick beat me to
> the fix. But
Patrick R. Michaud:
> Ruud H.G. van Tol:
>> 's/$/foo/' becomes 's//foo/'
>
> Uh, no, because is still a zero width assertion. :-)
That's why I chose it. It is not at the end-of-string?
>>>
>>> Because ".*" matches "", // would be true at
>>> every position in the string, in
Patrick R. Michaud:
> Ruud H.G. van Tol:
>> Patrick R. Michaud:
>>> Ruud H.G. van Tol:
's/$/foo/' becomes 's//foo/'
>>>
>>> Uh, no, because is still a zero width assertion. :-)
>>
>> That's why I chose it. It is not at the end-of-string?
>
> Because ".*" matches "", // would be true at
> ev
Larry Wall skribis 2005-11-21 12:08 (-0800):
> Unfortunately, though,
>
> would be ambiguous, and/or wrong.
Well, we could of course change "-" to mean "-1 or fewer", as "+" means
"+1 or more"... :D
Juerd
--
http://convolution.nl/maak_juerd_blij.html
http://convolution.nl/make_juerd_happy
Patrick R. Michaud:
>> 's/$/foo/' becomes 's//foo/'
>>
>
> Uh, no, because is still a zero width assertion. :-)
That's why I chose it. It is not at the end-of-string?
perl5 -e '$_="abc"; s/(?<=...)/x/; print'
perl5 -e '$_="abc"; s/(?!.)/x/; print'
's//foo/'
--
Grtz, Ruud
Larry Wall:
> in one of the updates, it says:
>
> +[Update: Actually, that's now written C<< <+alpha+digit> >>,
> avoiding +the mistaken impression entirely.]
In dev's A05.html I only found:
"[Update: That must now be written <++>, or it will be
mistaken for «alpha> looks right to me.
Ide
On Mon, Nov 21, 2005 at 07:57:59PM +0100, Ruud H.G. van Tol wrote:
: There is a "[[:alpha:][:digit:]" and a "[[:alpha:][:digit]]" on the
: A5-page.
Hmm, well, thanks--I went to fix it and I see Patrick beat me to
the fix. But in one of the updates, it says:
+[Update: Actually, that's now wri
Larry Wall:
> Ruud H.G. van Tol:
> dev.perl.org one day latency but html-ified
> svn.perl.org up to the minute but only in pod
Thanks, much better. Can't say that I haven't been there before.
There is a "[[:alpha:][:digit:]" and a "[[:alpha:][:digit]]" on the
A5-page.
>> The '^' could
On Mon, Nov 21, 2005 at 05:49:59PM +0100, Ruud H.G. van Tol wrote:
: Larry Wall:
: > Juerd:
: >> Ruud:
:
: >>> Maybe
: >>> "\x{123a 123b 123c}"
: >>> is a nice alternative of
: >>> "\x{123a} \x{123b} \x{123c}".
: >>
: >> Hmm, very cute and friendly! Can we keep it, please? Please?
:
: Tha
Larry Wall:
> Juerd:
>> Ruud:
>>> Maybe
>>> "\x{123a 123b 123c}"
>>> is a nice alternative of
>>> "\x{123a} \x{123b} \x{123c}".
>>
>> Hmm, very cute and friendly! Can we keep it, please? Please?
Thanks for the support.
> We already have, from A5, \x[0a;0d], so you can supposedly say
>
> >> It may be a bit before Ex4 is done. Damian's on a cruise ship at
> >> the moment, so even if he's got the time (and I don't think he
> >> does) he's likely lacking connectivity. I expect he'll give us
> >> word at some point what the schedule is.
> >
> >They've got connectivity all right.
At 4:17 PM -0500 1/18/02, Michael G Schwern wrote:
>On Fri, Jan 18, 2002 at 03:35:59PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
>> At 10:16 AM +0200 1/18/02, raptor wrote:
>> >Did u passed "Bermuda Triangle" :")
>>
>> It may be a bit before Ex4 is done. Damian's on a cruise ship at the
>> moment, so even if
On Fri, Jan 18, 2002 at 03:35:59PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> At 10:16 AM +0200 1/18/02, raptor wrote:
> >Did u passed "Bermuda Triangle" :")
>
> It may be a bit before Ex4 is done. Damian's on a cruise ship at the
> moment, so even if he's got the time (and I don't think he does) he's
> like
At 10:16 AM +0200 1/18/02, raptor wrote:
>Did u passed "Bermuda Triangle" :")
It may be a bit before Ex4 is done. Damian's on a cruise ship at the
moment, so even if he's got the time (and I don't think he does) he's
likely lacking connectivity. I expect he'll give us word at some
point what t
Did u passed "Bermuda Triangle" :")
raptor
18 matches
Mail list logo
