From: Thomas Adam <thomas_adam16@...>
Date: 2003-09-04T21:55:27+09:00
Subject: Re: Simple question(s)

Presumably, one can also use a "try..catch" scenario here too?

-- Thomas Adam

 --- Gavin Sinclair <gsinclair@soyabean.com.au> wrote: 

> On Thursday, September 4, 2003, 12:04:47 PM, Jason wrote:
> 
> > this = "Dec 12"
> > that, other = /(\w+) (\d+)/.match(this).captures
> > p that, other
> 
> > ....but this will run into problems when there's not a match, and
> > Regexp#match returns nil. So something like this might be better
> 
> > if m = /(\w+) (\d+)/.match(this)
> >   that, other = m.captures
> >   # Do stuff with "that" and "other"
> > else
> >   # We didn't match, do something about it
> > end
> 
> 
> Good point.  I'd probably use exception handling.
> 
>   that, other = REGEX.match(STR).captures rescue []
> 
> The two variables will receive nil if the match fails.  That's
> slightly dodgy (may catch other exception?) but concise.  If you want
> to handle it more explicitly, then
> 
>   begin
>     that, other = REGEX.match(STR).captures
>   rescue NoMethodError
>     # handle it
>   end
> 
> Gavin
> 
>  

=====
Thomas Adam

"The Linux Weekend Mechanic" -- www.linuxgazette.com

________________________________________________________________________
Want to chat instantly with your online friends?  Get the FREE Yahoo!
Messenger http://mail.messenger.yahoo.co.uk