On Thu, Mar 21, 2002 at 09:18:30AM +0100, Bart Lateur wrote: > On Thu, 21 Mar 2002 00:55:07 -0500 (EST), Michel J Lambert wrote: > >I have yet to figure out if anyone uses complicated regexes enough that > >something like this would be useful. But I still think it's fun, > >regardless of practical benefits. > > One place where this just might be useful, would be where your regex > engine behaves differently than Perl's. You know: the DFA vs. "NFA" > thing (while Perl's engine is not quite an actual NFA). You could > implement a DFA.
That already have been proposed by tilly at perlmonks - see http://www.perlmonks.org/index.pl?lastnode_id=59526&node_id=59557 http://www.xray.mpe.mpg.de/mailing-lists/perl5-porters/2000-05/msg00853.html he wanted to implement it too, but looks like his current employer wants to prohibit him from contributing any code as open source, regardless of whether he does it in his leisure time, or at work. For details, http://www.perlmonks.org/index.pl?lastnode_id=26179&node_id=153046 (there is a discussion at slashdot right now about this.) (This is from `not-fun-with-perl-at-all' department.)
