On Fri, 28 Mar 2008 02:09:19 -0400, "Matt Wozniski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> For what it's worth, I disagree strongly. This behavior is nothing > but a bug in the existing implementation - a documented bug, but a bug > nonetheless. In this particular case, I definitely think that we > should strive for compatibility with other regex engines, rather than > backwards compatibility with older vim versions. [snip] > Since the old guarantee > that the leftmost alternation is matched first in fact makes regexes > work differently than in Perl, Many regular expression engines have ordered alternation, including Perl's. Given that alternations do have an order, why force that order to be disregarded? Responding to the ordering of alternatives may mean that the regular expressions aren't "pure", but any notion of purity in the regular expression language was abandoned years ago in favour of functionality. -- Matthew Winn --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
