------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
http://bugs.exim.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1393 --- Comment #6 from Philip Hazel <[email protected]> 2013-10-09 11:08:54 --- On Tue, 8 Oct 2013, ouadji wrote: > "Even more unlikely is the introduction of a new meta-character like the > ~ you suggest. It would break many patterns. > > ???? > it would not break the existing patterns. (i don't understand) This existing pattern would break: (3)~\1 It currently matches the string "3~3". > The patterns that don't have this character would not be broken > it would affect only the patterns that inclue this new character. Indeed, but there are probably many such patterns. I would never introduce a new non-Perl top-level metacharacter like this. It did occur to me that, since Perl now uses \g{3} (for example) for back references, the obvious syntax would be \G{3}, but unfortunately Perl already uses \G for something else. However, one could use \g{^3} I suppose, and \g{^-3} and \g{^+3} for relative references, and \g{^name} for references by name. (^ is used for "not" in other places, so is better than ~ for this.) Regards, Philip -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.exim.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email -- ## List details at https://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/pcre-dev
