From: "Jesús Gabriel y Galán" <jgabrielygalan@...>
Date: 2008-11-19T22:18:49+09:00
Subject: Re: RegExp problem

On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 1:01 PM, Florian Gilcher <flo@andersground.net> wrote:

> Because you could get problems when you have things like this:
>
> "foo@fooo@bar@batz@foo"
>
> you rely on the the behaviour of the dot. Meaning: yours matches
>
> fooo@bar@batz
>
> Thus, it ignores all inner delimiters.

Well, with the correction, it doesn't anymore:

irb(main):071:0> "foo@fooo@bar@batz@foo".match(/([#{delimiter}])(.*?)\1/)[2]
=> "fooo"

> In any case, mine matches:
>
> [["fooo"],["batz"]] #String#scan output
>

irb(main):072:0> "foo@fooo@bar@batz@foo".scan(/([#{delimiter}])(.*?)\1/)
=> [["@", "fooo"], ["@", "batz"]]

> Depending on how the dot is treated (greediness etc.), yours
> could also have other interpretations (like mine) while mine is clearer in
> that respect.

Well, obviously this only works as expected if you use the non-greedy version.
But I understand what you mean about being clearer, more explicit.

> In a simple case with only 2 delimiters, it doesn't matter.

With more delimiters present in the string, mine works too.

Thanks,

Jesus.