Nice trick using the -1 index like that, I'll have to remember that...
Regarding the original question though, I was hoping for a solution that keeps the regexes, because even if replacing them with split is possible in this case, that won't always be feasible if dealing with more complex regexes.
In reply to Re^2: Is there a more functional regex syntax?
by smls
in thread Is there a more functional regex syntax?
by smls
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |