Any reason why this wouldn't be better served if it were on the ORO or
Regexp lists?
Am just assuming they'd be the experts here.
Hen
On Thu, 4 Sep 2003, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> Leo Sutic observed:
> > Just a comment: Instead of using exceptions, how about this:
> > public interface MatchObserver {
> > public void onMatch (long offset, byte b, String pattern);
> > }
>
> Excellent comment; even better. :-) And since we're not interrupting the
> I/O stream with the exception, we can probably get rid of the byte.
>
> An alternative would be to add an Observer (actually, wouldn't that be a
> Listener, to remain consistent with Java terminology? :-)) with the pattern,
> although it seems that none of the regex engines support compiling multiple
> patterns, which I find truely bizzare. That would allow the Listener code
> to execute as each pattern is found in the stream.
>
> I would expect further interface tweaking, but the first thing we need is
> code capable of supporting this construct.
>
> --- Noel
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
