Re^3: Is there a more functional regex syntax?

Thank, this is what I've been looking for!

It's not extremely pretty, but it should scale nicely for the general case of needing the result of a regex string extraction as a right-hand-side value.

PS: The regex suggested by tobyink above can make the single-line case much more readable: /(\d+)/g

Comment on Re^3: Is there a more functional regex syntax? Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: Is there a more functional regex syntax? by kennethk (Abbot) on Sep 18, 2012 at 17:35 UTC
The regex suggested by tobyink above can make the single-line case much more readable The advantage of mine is that it actually enforces format, which may or may not be of concern. I also like that you expect two values and you get two values; a little less slight of hand for maintenance. But I do appreciate the elegance of his choice of indices. Also be aware you'll need to initialize `@totals = (0,0)` so that the index `-1` doesn't map to your first term. tobyink does it, but didn't really emphasize its importance. #11929 First ask yourself `How would I do this without a computer?' Then have the computer do it the same way.	[reply] [d/l] [select]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re^4: Is there a more functional regex syntax?
by kennethk (Abbot) on Sep 18, 2012 at 17:35 UTC

The regex suggested by tobyink above can make the single-line case much more readable

The advantage of mine is that it actually enforces format, which may or may not be of concern. I also like that you expect two values and you get two values; a little less slight of hand for maintenance. But I do appreciate the elegance of his choice of indices.

Also be aware you'll need to initialize @totals = (0,0) so that the index -1 doesn't map to your first term. tobyink does it, but didn't really emphasize its importance.

#11929 First ask yourself `How would I do this without a computer?' Then have the computer do it the same way.

[reply]
[d/l]
[select]