On 5/22/14 6:48 PM, "Karsten Bräckelmann" wrote:
>On Thu, 2014-05-22 at 18:34 -0500, David B Funk wrote:
>> After doing some experimenting with that code I came up with something
>>that
>> I'd argue is more semantically correct:
>>
>> # if we've got a long series of blank lines, limit them
On Thu, 2014-05-22 at 18:34 -0500, David B Funk wrote:
> After doing some experimenting with that code I came up with something that
> I'd argue is more semantically correct:
>
> # if we've got a long series of blank lines, limit them
> if (defined $start) {
>my $max_blank_lines
On Thu, 22 May 2014, David B Funk wrote:
On Thu, 22 May 2014, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
On Thu, 2014-05-22 at 03:12 +0200, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
[snip..]
The number of continuation lines equals the number of newlines in the
test-case.
Well, up until 12, that is. :-/
Any number up to
On Thu, 22 May 2014, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
On Thu, 2014-05-22 at 03:12 +0200, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
[snip..]
The number of continuation lines equals the number of newlines in the
test-case.
Well, up until 12, that is. :-/
Any number up to 11 of consecutive newlines can be matched w
On Thu, 2014-05-22 at 03:12 +0200, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
> In either case, having a sample would speed up this ping-pong style
> debugging. And I am curious. ;) Mind putting your sample up a pastebin?
Ian sent me the original message off-list. It indeed contains about 16
consecutive newlines
