On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 08:00:55AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 09:49:36AM -0500, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
> : But what if your subrule needs to know exactly which key matched or
> : needs to match the key again for some reason? The second passage says
> : that you may access they actual text that matched with $<KEY> and you
> : may again match the actual key that matched with the <KEY> assertion.
> Close, but that last bit isn't quite true.  If you read the passage
> again carefully, you'll note the magic words "as if".  There is no
> actual <KEY> assertion, only the remaining smile, like a Cheshire cat.
> If you want to reset to before the key for some reason, you can always
> set .pos to $<KEY>.beg, or whatever the name of the method is.  Hmm,
> that looks like it's unspecced.
Why don't we just have <KEY> work as an assertation, instead of having this
strange "as if" thing?

        -=- James Mastros,

Reply via email to