> I propose adding this note. His preference for the working of
> /t and /g seems the most appropriate. Unless I here any further
> discussion I propose moving this RFC to frozen this week.
Please post a complete, revised version of the RFC *before* you freeze it.
This list has gone a little quiet...
Hugo wrote:
> I like this too. I'd suggest /t should mean a) return a scalar of
> the number of matches and b) don't set any special variables. Then
> /t without /g would return 0 or 1, but be faster since no extra
> information need be captured (except intern
