On Saturday 10 April 2004 12:42, Tim Bunce wrote: > Perhaps Data::DeepReplacePMC What do you think about:
PMC::DeepReplace (Data::Replace) PMC::Printable (Data::Escape) PMC::Sort (Data::Sort) PMC::Dumper (Data::Dumper) > (We've learnt the hard way with Perl5 modules names that more words are > good. Keeping module names very short is a false economy.) If the name isn't good enough, it is not always the best idea to make it just longer. > You're assuming that the name will always be seen in the context > of it defining module. That may not be the case in the future. "Other language" has to use find_global in order to find the Subs declared in these libraries. You have to specify the namespace as well as the function name to lookup the sub ref. The language itself can then store it in a variable named "escape_string" or something similar. > > > (And I wonder how different languages escape strings, > > > and if there's a common subset that'll work for all/most of them.) > > > > Its C and PIR like escaping, it relaces some ASCII code with \n, \t, \r > > and replaces ' with \' in strings quoted with ', and " with \" in strings > > quoted with ". > > escape_string_cstyle perhaps It is a widely used format. escape_string_c_and_cpp_and_perl_and_shell_and_so_on_style? ;-) > Tim. jens
