Re: RFC 198 (v2) Boolean Regexes

2000-09-27 Thread Richard Proctor
HI Tom, Welcome to England (I presume) > This seems very complicated. Did you look at the Ram:6 recipe on > expressing AND, OR, and NOT in a regex? For example, to do > /FOO/ && /BAR/ you need not write /FOO.*BAR|BAR.*FOO/ -- and in > fact, should not, as it doesn't work properly on some pa

RFC 198 (v2) Boolean Regexes

2000-09-27 Thread Tom Christiansen
This seems very complicated. Did you look at the Ram:6 recipe on expressing AND, OR, and NOT in a regex? For example, to do /FOO/ && /BAR/ you need not write /FOO.*BAR|BAR.*FOO/ -- and in fact, should not, as it doesn't work properly on some pairs! For example, /CAN/ && /ANAL/ can't be written

RFC 198 (v2) Boolean Regexes

2000-09-22 Thread Perl6 RFC Librarian
This and other RFCs are available on the web at http://dev.perl.org/rfc/ =head1 TITLE Boolean Regexes =head1 VERSION Maintainer: Richard Proctor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: 6 Sep 2000 Last Modified: 22 Sep 2000 Mailing List: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Number: 198 Version: 2 Status: Devel