On 5/13/05, Patrick R. Michaud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> To use the phrase from later in your message, there's still
> the "implicit .*? followed by the rule call." Since the rule
> itself hasn't failed (only the group failed), we're still free to
> try to match the pattern at later positions.
I'm basically saying that you should treat your:
$str ~~ /abc :: def | ghi :: jkl | mn :: op/;
As:
$rule = rx/abc :: def | ghi :: jkl | mn :: op/;
$str ~~ /^ .*? <$rule>/;
Which means that you fail the rule, your .*? advances to the next
character and tries the rule again.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding your interpretation (when in doubt, explain
with code).
Luke
