Yes, even without testing this looks right, your embedded Perl excludes all former characters in a character class.*
> Personally, I don't find this particular (??{ }) construct too terrible...
It's a theoretical question, I wouldn't use a regex anyway. It's about exploring the limits.
> but without (?{ }) or (??{ })? (Anything else that's not allowed?)
Basically yes.
The less cheating the better, ie a portable solution would be perfect. (Bigly doubt)
Using implementation details or experimental features less so. (Sad )
> Update: A bit of research on variable-width lookbehind:
Regarding the older discussions:
I don't see how \K could be applied here, the perldocs are IMHO wrong to claim it was generally allowing variable length look behinds.
IMHO does \K only apply for s/// .
Cheers Rolf
(addicted to the Perl Programming Language and ☆☆☆☆ :)
Je suis Charlie!
*) that's the approach I would try to implement with recursive patterns
In reply to Re^2: Regex: matching character which happens exactly once
by LanX
in thread Regex: matching character which happens exactly once
by LanX
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |