in reply to Re^5: regexp question
in thread regexp question
I think we have a problem of misnegation here.
You said:
A dot already matches everything but a single character.
On the other hand, in several places, perldoc says stuff like 'a dot matches any character'.
(BTW, I've deliberately avoided any mention of the newline character, as it's not relevant to this discussion.)
So how do you defend your statement 'A dot (..) matches everything but a single character' in the face of the evidence?
|
|---|
| Replies are listed 'Best First'. | |
|---|---|
|
Re^7: regexp question
by JavaFan (Canon) on Oct 28, 2011 at 19:25 UTC |