On Thursday 04 July 2002 11:07 am, Ashley Winters wrote: > > I would expect /a<*1..2>?/ to mean /[a<*1..2>]?/ just looking at it. How > can ? ever mean non-greedy unless it follows a metachar <[*+?]>?
Perhaps I can respond to my own question. In /.+?/ . is an assertion, + is an assertion, and ? is a modifier. Therefore, it means /<.><1,Inf>:m/ or something close, where :m is mnemonic for minimal. Did apoc 5 ever say . means <.>? Ashley Winters
