If I agree that matching >2 '\' is not intended, would you agree that it is still a valid UNC path ?
My intent was to provide the simplest possible regex. To do a production-level job, I would certainly invoke something like Path::Dispatcher::Rule::Regex .
All great truths begin as blasphemies.
― George Bernard Shaw, writer, Nobel laureate (1856-1950)
| [reply] |
The simplest possible regex to match the OP's string is /.*/ ;)
CountZero A program should be light and agile, its subroutines connected like a string of pearls. The spirit and intent of the program should be retained throughout. There should be neither too little or too much, neither needless loops nor useless variables, neither lack of structure nor overwhelming rigidity." - The Tao of Programming, 4.1 - Geoffrey James My blog: Imperial Deltronics
| [reply]
[d/l] |
Maybe it's not intended, but it certainly fits the specification given by the OP.
95% of the effort of finding a regexp is stating actual definition of what you want. If people spend half the time it takes to write down a Perlmonks question in actually formulating what they want, we'd see far less regexp questions here, and we'd need to do far less guessing of what the OP wants. Because if what is wanted isn't stated accurately, all that can be done is play the lottery, and guess what is wanted. | [reply] |