On Mon, 10 Nov 2008, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Ian Hilt <ian.hilt@xxxxxxx> writes:
>
> > On Sun, 9 Nov 2008, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> >> Ian Hilt <ian.hilt@xxxxxxx> writes:
> >>
> >> > On Sun, 9 Nov 2008, Francis Galiegue wrote:
> >> >> Le Sunday 09 November 2008 13:59:48 Ian Hilt, vous avez écrit :
> >> >> > + if ($c_file =~ /^To:\s*+(.+)\s*\nCc:/ism) {
> >> >>
> >> >> Greedy operators are only supported with perl 5.10 or more... I think it's a
> >> >> bad idea to use them...
> >> ...
> >> You expect something non-blank there anyway, so why not do:
> >>
> >> To:\s*(\S.*?)\s*\n....
> >
> > That works. Although, I seem to be missing Francis' point. According
> > to perlre, a quantified subpattern is "greedy". So a "greedy operator"
> > is any one of the standard quantified subpatterns. The "+" and "?"
> > modify its matching behavior. And it seems to me that it _has_ to use a
> > q.s. to work ...
>
> The "perlre" documentation you are reading is from Perl 5.10.0; check
> "perldelta" documentation next to it.
>
> I think you are wrong in saying that "it _has_ to use". Yes, you _can_
> use possessive quantifiers to write that pattern (provided if you can
> limit your users to Perl 5.10.0 or later), but you do _not_ have to (and I
> just showed you how). By not using the new feature, you can make it work
> for people with older version of Perl.
Right. I was saying it has to use quantifiers, in general, not that it
has to use possessive quantifiers.
