On Mon, 28 Aug 2000 14:22:03 +1100 (EST), Damian Conway wrote: > > I don't get it. What makes it so hard? If you see a "/" when you're > > expecting an operator, or end of statement, then it's division. If you > > were expecting an expression, it's a regex. Ain't it? > >Yes. And that's what makes it hard. Because somethimes you can be >expecting *either* of those :-) > >Consider the statement: > > wash / my / gimsox; > >Division or pattern match? Ah I see. Well, requiring m// doesn't really help, in the general case. foo -2 subtraction or function call with parameter -2? -- Bart.
- Re: RFC 135 (v2) Require explici... Casey R. Tweten
- Re: RFC 135 (v2) Require explici... Nathan Wiger
- Re: RFC 135 (v2) Require explici... John Porter
- Re: RFC 135 (v2) Require explici... Bart Lateur
- Re: RFC 135 (v2) Require explici... John Porter
- New match and subst replacements... Nathan Wiger
- Re: New match and subst replacem... Randy J. Ray
- Re: New match and subst replacem... Nathan Wiger
- Re: New match and subst replacem... Bart Lateur
- Re: RFC 135 (v2) Require explici... Damian Conway
- Re: RFC 135 (v2) Require explici... Bart Lateur
- Re: RFC 135 (v2) Require explicit m on matche... Peter Scott
- Re: RFC 135 (v2) Require explicit m on matches, e... Damian Conway
- Re: RFC 135 (v2) Require explicit m on matches, even with... Damian Conway
- RE: RFC 135 (v2) Require explicit m on matches, even with ... Fisher Mark