Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>> Patterns should not include the separator (not even escaped, unless
>>> you fancy having to use a semantically significant metacharacter for
>>> your separator), even as part of a ...
>
> No. The problem is exactly when you use a semantically significant
> metacharacter for your separator.
The wording "not even escaped, unless you fancy having to ..." was
rhetorical understatement; the idea is that "having to use ..." is not
something that anyone would fancy doing. I wasn't suggesting a literal
wording, which is why I wrote "something a bit more like". Sorry for the
confusing linguistics!
cheers,
DaveK
