Re: Variable-length negative lookbehind

Or, you can use multiple variable-length look-behinds. Which is what I ended up doing, actually.

------
We are the carpenters and bricklayers of the Information Age.

Then there are Damian modules.... *sigh* ... that's not about being less-lazy -- that's about being on some really good drugs -- you know, there is no spoon. - flyingmoose

I shouldn't have to say this, but any code, unless otherwise stated, is untested

Comment on Re: Variable-length negative lookbehind

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Variable-length negative lookbehind by Roy Johnson (Monsignor) on May 07, 2004 at 18:47 UTC
You can only use multiple fixed-length look-behinds if you have a discrete set of alternatives. You couldn't represent `(?!<fo+)` that way. As it turns out, a single positive look-behind was sufficient for your problem. The PerlMonk `tr///` Advocate	[reply] [d/l]