On Jan 18, 2006, at 1:18 AM, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
On Tue, Jan 17, 2006 at 12:35:57PM -0500, Mark Reed wrote:
On 2006-01-17 12:24 PM, "Gaal Yahas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[split on empty string] doesn's seem to be specced yet.
I would prefer the current pugs behavior; it's consistent with the
general
case, in which a string which does not match the splitting regex
results in
a single-item list containing the original string. This is the
Python
behavior.
I find the Perl5 (and, surprisingly, Ruby) behavior rather
counterintuitive.
FWIW, I agree with Mark.
-Scott
Just to show opposite, I've always found that behavior (i.e.
returning the original string unchanged) confusing. C<split> works
based on sequential examination of the target string to locate
matching substrings on which to split. There is a matching "empty
string" substring between every character. Naturally, what you get
back is an array of characters.
Plus, it's a useful idiom.
--Dks
