From: David Alan Black <dblack@...>
Date: 2002-05-19T10:56:14+09:00
Subject: Re: Ruby regex question

Hi --

On Sun, 19 May 2002, Dossy wrote:

> On 2002.05.19, Michael Campbell <michael_s_campbell@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > I'm probably in the minority and I'm ok with that, but #match
> > matching n things but returning n+1 values breaks MY worldview of
> > "least astonishment".
> >
> > Then again, I've come from a perl background, so maybe my worldview
> > needs adjusting.
>
> Well, what would be _cool_ is if the "if" worked like this:
>
>     if matched, x, y = str.match /(.)(.)/   # boobies!  sorry, couldn't resist
>       puts "we matched."
>     else
>       puts "we didn't match."
>     end
>
> Of course, matched would be an instance of either TrueClass or
> FalseClass ... ;-)

You want a method called #match that throws away the match? :-)


David

-- 
David Alan Black
home: dblack@candle.superlink.net
work: blackdav@shu.edu
Web:  http://pirate.shu.edu/~blackdav