Re: Regex question

This will work:

my ($number) = $data =~ /\d+/g;

The match operator returns the matched substrings only in list context, which is why your first code worked (assignment to an array). By using extra parentheses (like in my code above), you can turn a scalar assignment into a list assignment.

Update: You won't need the /g flag if you use capturing parentheses:

my ($number) = $data =~ /(\d+)/;
[download]

Comment on Re: Regex question Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Regex question by chromatic (Archbishop) on Oct 14, 2008 at 18:22 UTC
(assignment to an array) I think you mean assignment to a list.	[reply]
Re^3: Regex question by betterworld (Curate) on Oct 18, 2008 at 11:38 UTC
Hmm, I meant this line of the OP's code: `my @nums = $data =~ /\d+/g;` I think it can be called an assignment to an array, which imposes a list context on the right-hand side, as it is described in perldata: Assignment to a scalar evaluates the right-hand side in scalar context, while assignment to an array or hash evaluates the righthand side in list context. Assignment to a list (or slice, which is just a list anyway) also evaluates the righthand side in list context. I think this would be an assignment to a list: `my ($num) = ...` [download]	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^2: Regex question by JavaFan (Canon) on Oct 14, 2008 at 10:41 UTC
Yeah, but it's actually the other way around. If you're using /g in list context, and only want to capture the entire match, you don't need the parenthesis. That is, if you have any capturing parenthesis, no additional parenthesis are implied.	[reply]
Re^3: Regex question by betterworld (Curate) on Oct 14, 2008 at 10:55 UTC
If you're using /g in list context, and only want to capture the entire match, you don't need the parenthesis. I don't think that this contradicts what I wrote. I was only suggesting to use parentheses rather than /g, because I wouldn't use the /g flag unless I really want to match several occurrences. (However, as Larry Wall put it: The argument against using an operator for other than its primary purpose strikes me the same as the old argument that you shouldn't have sex for other than procreational purposes. Sometimes side effects are more enjoyable than the originally intended effect.)	[reply]