Too bad .. I just thought for the sake of orthogonality that {,m] should have been present, with an implied 1 for the missing value. But it sounds like there are equally good arguments for having the implied value be 0 .. so perhaps the decision was made not to implement that grammar at all.
Lesson learned .. thanks for the udpate.
In reply to Re^2: Oddness with regex quantifiers
by talexb
in thread Oddness with regex quantifiers
by talexb
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |