> If my proposal has a hidden agenda, it's that I want to show that > you can get a lot of the power we want without actually having to > embed arbitrary code.
In general, however, I think that embedding code in regexes is a *very* good idea. Sure you can get a lot of power without it, but it is much more intuitive with it. I would rather embed some code to tell it what to match than make some complex thing with back-referencing capture blocks inside the usual regex syntax. Perhaps there could be some built-in regex security feature, like, say, no syscalls in regexes unless you enable it with a use syscalls 'unlink' or something. What we need to do is make regexes more readable, more understandable with our extensions. /x isn't good enough (though it is good). Named captures are going the right direction. Luke
