John Rudd wrote:
> Matt Kettler wrote:
>> John Rudd wrote:
>>> Matt Kettler wrote:
>>>
>>>> Really in regexes there is no such thing as an AND operation. It's
>>>> just
>>>> not something natural to do in a regex.
>>> I would argue, at a deeper level of language/grammar theory, that this
>>> isn't true. Instead, AND is implied by concatenation.
>> No it's not. Concatenation is order-specific. AND is order non-specific.
>>
>
> I'd have to break out a textbook (which means _find_ my textbooks on
> the material) to continue the discussion meaningfully. I'm just glad
> anyone at all replied to the question meaningfully :-}
>
>
The key is that in boolean algebra, AND has the commutative property.
This means that A and B is the same as B and A.
