in reply to
Re: (jptxs)Re: Perl is psychic?!
in thread
Perl is psychic?!
Whoever voted down the above node completely missed the point.
MrNobo1024
is completely correct in saying that if Perl worked as documented as far back as, say, Camel 2 then it should not have had enough information to calculate $&.
Comment on
Re (tilly) 3: Perl is psychic?!
In Section
Seekers of Perl Wisdom