Hugo wrote:
> The difficulty with variable-length lookbehind (let's call it
> VLLB) is this: suppose that we want to match "abcdef...xyz" =~
> /(?<=x+)y/. In theory, to check the possible /x+/ matches in
> the right order [0] we need to check whether there we can match
> 0 characters at offset 0 (
On Tue, Sep 12, 2000 at 05:16:17AM +0100, Hugo wrote:
> :Simply put, I want variable-length lookbehind.
>
> The difficulty with variable-length lookbehind (let's call it
> VLLB) is this: suppose that we want to match "abcdef...xyz" =~
> /(?<=x+)y/. In theory, to check the possible /x+/ matches in
On Mon, 11 Sep 2000, Mark-Jason Dominus wrote:
>
> perl6-language-regex
>
> Summary report 2911
>
> RFC 164: Replace =~, !~, m//, s///, and tr// with match(), subst(),
> and trade() (Nathan Wiger)
>
> Surprisingly, there was no discussion about this RFC this week.
I only read th
On Wed 13 Sep, Bart Lateur wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Sep 2000 19:01:35 -0400, Mark-Jason Dominus wrote:
>
> >I don't know what you mean, but you're mistaken, because it means to
> >interpolate @foo as in a double-quoted string.
>
> Which is precisely the meaning he wants for it, with $" set to '|'.
>
John Porter wrote:
> Mark Dominus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> > This behavior should be changed. If the PATTERN is empty, Perl should
> > look for the empty string. (That is, if the PATTERN is empty, it
> > should always match.)
>
> Except perhaps for undef loperands? (matchees? bindees?)
Wh
>Thinking about the comparision between the two RFCs there is some common
>ground, but cases where people will want your hash and cases where
>people will want explicit variables. Using RFC 112, you can do
>hash assignment, but it would not clear the hash beforehand whereas
>your hash assignment
From: Hugo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2000 2:54 PM
> 3. The regexp is matched left to right: first the lookbehind, then 'X',
> then '[yz]'.
Thanks for the insight - I was stuck in my bad assumption that the optimized
behavior was the only behavior.
What I am not sure of is
> On Tue, 12 Sep 2000 19:01:35 -0400, Mark-Jason Dominus wrote:
>
> >I don't know what you mean, but you're mistaken, because it means to
> >interpolate @foo as in a double-quoted string.
>
> Which is precisely the meaning he wants for it, with $" set to '|'.
"Which is precisely the meaning he
On Tue, 12 Sep 2000 19:01:35 -0400, Mark-Jason Dominus wrote:
>I don't know what you mean, but you're mistaken, because it means to
>interpolate @foo as in a double-quoted string.
Which is precisely the meaning he wants for it, with $" set to '|'.
I wonder if we're not trying too hard. What if,
