OK, I think this discussion should be closed. Richard should add a section to RFC110 that discusses the $count = () = m/PAT/g; locution and its advantages and disadvantages compared to his proposal, duly taking into account the many valuable comments that have been made. Thanks to everyone who participated in the discussion.
- Re: RFC 110 (v3) counting matches Tom Christiansen
- Re: RFC 110 (v3) counting matches Bart Lateur
- Re: RFC 110 (v3) counting matches Tom Christiansen
- Re: RFC 110 (v3) counting matches Bart Lateur
- Re: RFC 110 (v3) counting matches Mark-Jason Dominus
- Re: RFC 110 (v3) counting matches Tom Christiansen
- Re: RFC 110 (v3) counting matches Tom Christiansen
- Re: RFC 110 (v3) counting matches Tom Christiansen
- Re: RFC 110 (v3) counting matches Nathan Wiger
- Re: RFC 110 (v3) counting matches Tom Christiansen
- Re: RFC 110 (v3) counting matches Mark-Jason Dominus
- Re: RFC 110 (v3) counting matches Richard Proctor
- Re: RFC 110 (v3) counting matches Philip Newton
- Re: RFC 110 (v3) counting matches Mark-Jason Dominus
- Re: RFC 110 (v3) counting matches Nathan Wiger
- Re: RFC 110 (v3) counting matches Tom Christiansen
- Re: RFC 110 (v3) counting matches Steve Fink
- Re: RFC 110 (v3) counting matches Chaim Frenkel
- Re: RFC 110 (v3) counting matches Jonathan Scott Duff
- Re: RFC 110 (v3) counting matches Joe McMahon
- Re: RFC 110 (v3) counting matches Jonathan Scott Duff