From: Dr.Ruud on
Steve M wrote:

> To access a literal '.' you need to backslash it

Or quotemeta it, or put it in a character class, or mention it as \x2E,
etc., etc.

--
Ruud
From: Uri Guttman on
>>>>> "R" == Ruud <rvtol+usenet(a)xs4all.nl> writes:

R> Steve M wrote:
>> To access a literal '.' you need to backslash it

R> Or quotemeta it, or put it in a character class, or mention it as
R> \x2E, etc., etc.

i would never encode a literal . as \2e. too obscure and what about
unicode (not that i am anything but an ascii bigot! :)?

i generally use \. but [.] is ok imo.

uri

--
Uri Guttman ------ uri(a)stemsystems.com -------- http://www.sysarch.com --
----- Perl Code Review , Architecture, Development, Training, Support ------
--------- Gourmet Hot Cocoa Mix ---- http://bestfriendscocoa.com ---------
From: Dr.Ruud on
Uri Guttman wrote:

> i generally use \. but [.] is ok imo.

The performance loss was lifted in 5.10, IIRC.

--
Ruud
From: Uri Guttman on
>>>>> "R" == Ruud <rvtol+usenet(a)xs4all.nl> writes:

R> Uri Guttman wrote:
>> i generally use \. but [.] is ok imo.

R> The performance loss was lifted in 5.10, IIRC.

i wasn't concerned with performance but style. the hex version of . is
what i never want to see. i don't need to look up hex codes to see you
are trying to match a literal . :)

uri

--
Uri Guttman ------ uri(a)stemsystems.com -------- http://www.sysarch.com --
----- Perl Code Review , Architecture, Development, Training, Support ------
--------- Gourmet Hot Cocoa Mix ---- http://bestfriendscocoa.com ---------
From: Dr.Ruud on
Uri Guttman wrote:
> Ruud:
>> Uri:

>>> i generally use \. but [.] is ok imo.
>>
>> The performance loss was lifted in 5.10, IIRC.
>
> i wasn't concerned with performance but style. the hex version of . is
> what i never want to see. i don't need to look up hex codes to see you
> are trying to match a literal . :)

Don't shoot the messenger. :)

I don't understand why you reply on content that was no longer there.
And you are repeating what you expressed before.

I also don't understand why you assume that I addressed any concern of
yours.
I merely stated a "fact". (but it could be in 5.10.1 or later too)

--
Ruud