On Mon, Mar 11, 2002 at 12:31:25PM +1100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> I know, from bitter experience with Acme::EyeDrops, just how flaky
> the (?{}) construct is; normally you cannot use regular expressions
> inside it at all "because Perl's regex engine is not reentrant".
> And yet, mysteriously, the s///eg construct seems exempt from
> this "not rentrant rule". I do not understand.
Look more closely:
s/pattern1/s,pattern2,replacement,ge/ge;
The second substitution is part of the *replacement* for the first
substitution, not part of the pattern. Thus, when the regex engine is
working on pattern2, it is not working on pattern1, and vice versa; there's
no reentering going on.
Ronald
