[#4766] Wiki — "Glen Stampoultzis" <trinexus@...>

21 messages 2000/09/04
[#4768] RE: Wiki — "NAKAMURA, Hiroshi" <nahi@...> 2000/09/04

Hi, Glen,

[#4783] Re: Wiki — Masatoshi SEKI <m_seki@...> 2000/09/04

[#4785] Re: Wiki — "NAKAMURA, Hiroshi" <nakahiro@...> 2000/09/05

Howdy,

[#4883] Re-binding a block — Dave Thomas <Dave@...>

16 messages 2000/09/12

[#4930] Perl 6 rumblings -- RFC 225 (v1) Data: Superpositions — Conrad Schneiker <schneik@...>

Hi,

11 messages 2000/09/15

[#4936] Ruby Book Eng. translation editor's questions — Jon Babcock <jon@...>

20 messages 2000/09/16

[#5045] Proposal: Add constants to Math — Robert Feldt <feldt@...>

15 messages 2000/09/21

[#5077] Crazy idea? infix method calls — hal9000@...

This is a generalization of the "in" operator idea which I

17 messages 2000/09/22

[#5157] Compile Problem with 1.6.1 — Scott Billings <aerogems@...>

When I try to compile Ruby 1.6.1, I get the following error:

15 messages 2000/09/27

[ruby-talk:4754] Re: Possible regex bug?

From: Dave Thomas <Dave@...>
Date: 2000-09-02 16:12:37 UTC
List: ruby-talk #4754
ts <decoux@moulon.inra.fr> writes:

> >>>>> "D" == Dave Thomas <Dave@thomases.com> writes:
> 
> D> However... The point of my original post was not to say that there are 
> D> no differences between Perl and Ruby regexps, but to say that the
> D> behavior of String.split was consistent with Perl's when given a
> D> pattern that matched a zero length string. That seemed to be Conrad's
> D> concern.
> 
>  Yes but perl and ruby don't have the same notion of zero-length match

d'accord. That's true, but kind of orthogonal to the point that Conrad 
raised.

Perhaps we need a FAQ entry about zero length matches?


Dave

In This Thread