On Wed, Aug 30, 2000 at 11:54:29PM -0400, Mark-Jason Dominus wrote:
>
> The big thing I find missing from this RFC is compelling examples.
> You are proposing a major change to the regex engine but you only have
> two examples. Both involve only fixed strings and one of them is
> artificial. I
On Wed, Aug 30, 2000 at 04:07:51PM -0400, mike mulligan wrote:
> Can this be repackaged in such a way that it is a more natural extension of
> the existing regexp language?
>
> The RFC notes that the look-behind construct (?<= pattern) can almost be
> used. Two issues: 1. as currently implement
On Thu, Aug 31, 2000 at 12:34:05PM -0400, Mark-Jason Dominus wrote:
>
> perl6-language-regex
>
> Summary report 2831
>
> RFC 72: The regexp engine should go backward as well as
> forward. (Peter Heslin)
>
> This topic did not attract much discussio
On Sat, Sep 02, 2000 at 01:52:09PM +0200, Bart Lateur wrote:
> On 1 Sep 2000 20:50:20 -, Perl6 RFC Librarian wrote:
>
> >Imagine a very long input string containing data such as this:
> >
> >... GCAAGAATTGAACTGTAG ...
> >
> >If you want to match text that matches /GA+C/, but not when it
>
On Tue, Sep 12, 2000 at 05:16:17AM +0100, Hugo wrote:
> :Simply put, I want variable-length lookbehind.
>
> The difficulty with variable-length lookbehind (let's call it
> VLLB) is this: suppose that we want to match "abcdef...xyz" =~
> /(?<=x+)y/. In theory, to check the possible /x+/ matches in
