Re^2: Chomping Frenzy question

$str =~ s/(?:\Q$chompstr\E)+\z//;
[download]

Wouldn't this also fail if $chompstr contained \E ?

Or use the quotemeta builtin.

This is nice! I had used this function a few years ago, but meanwhile forgotten it.

By the way you'd have to use chomp and not chop

Of course, you are right. I was too careless when sketching my solutions...

--
Ronald Fischer <ynnor@mm.st>

Comment on Re^2: Chomping Frenzy question Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Chomping Frenzy question by moritz (Cardinal) on Jul 10, 2008 at 14:24 UTC
Wouldn't this also fail if $chompstr contained \E ? No, it's magic: `use strict; use warnings; my $str = 'foo\E**** <- this is a syntax error'; if ("foo" !~ m/\Q$str\E/){ print "No syntax error\n"; } __END__ No syntax error` [download] If the quoting had stopped by the embedded `\E`, you'd get the `Nested quantifiers in regex` error.	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^3: Chomping Frenzy question by ikegami (Patriarch) on Jul 10, 2008 at 18:40 UTC
Wouldn't this also fail if $chompstr contained \E ? No. That confused me when I first heard of \Q..\E too. \Q..\E doesn't prevent interpolation. \E isn't special in interpolated strings. It matches the two characters. "\" and "E" $ don't trigger interpolation in interpolated strings. It matches end of lines.	[reply]