Re^2: Questions concerning /o regex modifier

In other words, /o is still more efficient than leaving it out?

Also, it is a sign (a flag, if you will) to humans that the variables in this expression will not (and should not) change.

Comment on Re^2: Questions concerning /o regex modifier

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Questions concerning /o regex modifier by diotalevi (Canon) on Nov 29, 2006 at 21:17 UTC
It's not a signal to 99% of the humans that will read it because almost no one gets what /o does. There's just the "Oh! Optimized! Ok, it's more better n' good!" It is faster to avoid doing the concatenation and string comparison work than not but those are cheap operations. If you were optimizing for that then you could just as well pass in a qr// object. ⠤⠤ ⠙⠊⠕⠞⠁⠇⠑⠧⠊	[reply]
Re^4: Questions concerning /o regex modifier by sgt (Deacon) on Dec 01, 2006 at 22:48 UTC
really? I always thought /o had a good mnemonic from the start "compile once" ... and not many ... so you think once? why... the bad ones are /s and /m, I taught myself to read them as: /s superdot /m multi-anchor a rather long process actually if I remember correctly ... --steph	[reply]