Miko O'Sullivan writes:
: From: "Larry Wall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
: > It's unlikely that {n,m} will still have that meaning in Perl 6. Maybe
: we'll
: > have something like this:
: >
: > Perl 5 Perl 6
: > {1,3} <1..3>
: > {3} <3>
: > {3,} <3+>
: > {0,3} <3->
:
: What are your
From: "Larry Wall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> It's unlikely that {n,m} will still have that meaning in Perl 6. Maybe
we'll
> have something like this:
>
> Perl 5 Perl 6
> {1,3} <1..3>
> {3} <3>
> {3,} <3+>
> {0,3} <3->
What are your feelings on multiple ranges for matches? E.g. t
Aaron Sherman writes:
: Hopefully there will be some replacement. I can't count the number of
: times I've relied on things like:
:
: $b = qr/\d{1,3}/;
: if (@ip = ($addr =~ /($b)\.($b)\.($b)\.($b)/)) {
: die "$0: \"$addr\": bad IP\n" if grep {$_>255} @ip;
: print("0x",(map {s
On Tue, 2002-05-14 at 20:13, Larry Wall wrote:
> It's unlikely that {n,m} will still have that meaning in Perl 6. Maybe we'll
> have something like this:
>
> Perl 5Perl 6
> {1,3} <1..3>
> {3} <3>
> {3,} <3+>
> {0,3} <3->
>
> Then again, maybe
Trey Harris writes:
: One of the little bugaboos that got me a lot my first N years of doing
: Perl was that {m,} is a quantifier meaning "m or more", but {,n} is *not*
: a quantifier meaning "up to n". People like symmetry, and it seems
: logical that {,n} would DWIM, but it doesn't. I still ma
One of the little bugaboos that got me a lot my first N years of doing
Perl was that {m,} is a quantifier meaning "m or more", but {,n} is *not*
a quantifier meaning "up to n". People like symmetry, and it seems
logical that {,n} would DWIM, but it doesn't. I still make the mistake on
occassion.