Perl6 RFC Librarian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This and other RFCs are available on the web at
> http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
>
> =head1 TITLE
>
> Consolidate the $1 and C<\1> notations
I still say that this is a pointless change to scratch an itch that
only exists for woolly thinkers.
--
P
> I'm trying to stick to a general philosophy of what's in a reg-ex, and I can
> almost justify assertions since as you say, \d, ^, $, (?=), etc are these
> very sort of things. I've been avoiding most of this discussion because
> it's been so odd, I can't believe they'll ultimately get accepted.
On Sun, 1 Oct 2000, Bart Lateur wrote:
> It's not clear to me why you picked @/ as the name for the array. For
> mnemonic reasons, i.e. similarity with existing special variables, @& or
> @+ (see $& and $+) would make more sense. Well, @+ is taken...
Well, the main reason is that @/ w
On Mon, 2 Oct 2000 12:46:06 -0700 (PDT), Dave Storrs wrote:
> Well, the main reason is that @/ worked best for my particular
>brain.
But you cannot use it in an ordinary regex, can you? There's no way you
can put $/[1] between slashes in s/.../.../. BAckslashing it doesn't
work.
>@&
>woul
> Maintainer: Bart Lateur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: 28 Sep 2000
> Last Modified: 1 Oct 2000
> Mailing List: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Number: 348
> Version: 2
> Status: Frozen
> [can't find a good quote]
It'd be somwhat useful, I think, if you could return somthing like \matched
to
let
