Re: Re: Code in regexp

Does perl think that (??{ }) generates a zero-width assertion?

If that is the case, why should the + qualifier behave any differently to the {1,8} qualifier in pg's regex below?

It's surely a bug that one complains about matching empty string repeatedly, while the other seems to behave as non-zero width.

Jasper

Comment on Re: Re: Code in regexp

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Re: Code in regexp by Jasper (Chaplain) on Dec 12, 2002 at 16:27 UTC
Further to this (not that this thread isn't long dead), in Terje Kristensen's latest minigolf competition he came up with this: `-n $;[map{/./,/[^$&-T]/g}/(?=(.))/g].=$_}{print@` [download] Which does funny non zero width things for (?=) `perl -le 'print for "foo bar"=~/(?=(.))/g' foo bar oo bar o bar bar bar ar r` [download] I had no idea this would happen, anyway. Jasper	[reply] [d/l] [select]