--- Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Jun 29, 2004 at 10:52:34AM -0500, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote: > > : Or was that to imply that a literal "a" in the RE would be > : interpretted as a "grapheme a" when :u2 is active? > > I don't know what you mean by "grapheme a" there. If you mean, "Does > it match any grapheme that happens to be exactly U+0061?", then the > answer is yes.
In my original question, I meant to differentiate between 'grapheme' and 'possible component of a multibyte expression'. > If you mean "Does it wildcard to any grapheme that uses > U+0061 as the base character?", then the answer is probably no. We > have not yet come up with a syntax for that kind of wildcarding, > other than dropping down to codepoints [:u1 a \pM+] or some such. > That may or may not be sufficient. It'd be pretty easy to define a > <like a> assertion in any case. I think this is something that we'll want as a "mode", a la case-insensitivity. Think of it as "mark insensitivity." I'm not sure if this should be language/locale dependent or not, but a basic search feature for text is "fre'd" -> "fred". Maybe it can just roll into :i? =Austin
