Thanks, davido. You and ysth both hit on similar situations. I especially like the negated class (which ends up, in the regex engine being a many-valued class (I suspect...though I'm by no means that knowledgable of the regex engine).
In my response to ysth, I wondered why one wouldn't except the single engtry, programmatically built-up case and provide a more regex-engine-efficient cast in that instance. Your comment that:
...is simply one less thing to worry about.
makes good sense to me and is in the spirit of what a lot of Perl culture is all about.
I think I'd probably take the extra effort to check for the single entry and try to cast it as a special case; but that's just my compulsive nature.
Thanks, davido (and everyone) for your insights. You're all helping me to be a better monk.
In reply to Re^2: Why would one want in a regex a class with only a single entry?
by ack
in thread Why would one want in a regex a class with only a single entry?
by ack
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |