Re: RFC 110 (v3) counting matches

On Thu, Aug 31, 2000 at 12:52:23PM -0400, Joe McMahon wrote:
>                
> /($pat1)($pat2)($pat3)(?{sub1(@\)$pat4|?{sub2(@\)}$pat5|?{sub3(@\)})/
> 
> This would translate to "if pat1pat2pat3 matches, call sub1 with all the 
> matches to that point  if pat4 matches afterward, otherwise call sub2 
> with all the matches if pat5 matches, else just call sub3." The key bit 
> here is that you pass over the sub call, deferring it until you've 
> decided if the whole match worked, then picking the one that succeeded 
> and calling it. If you don't like the syntax, please feel free to 
> propose another. 

Hmm...  Isn't that just equivalent to this (expanded for readability):

	/
                ($pat1)($pat2)($pat3)
                (?:
                        $pat4(?{sub1($1,$2,$3)}) |
                        $pat5(?{sub2($1,$2,$3)}) |
                             (?{sub3($1,$2,$3)})
                )
        /x;                  

?

If so, all we're missing is @\

> @\ seemed a good mnemonic for "the array of backreferences I already
> matched".

Yes, it does.

-Scott
-- 
Jonathan Scott Duff
[email protected]