Re: New match and subst replacements for =~ and !~ (was Re: RFC 135 (v2) Require explicit m on matches, even with ?? and // as delimiters.)

Nathan Wiger <[email protected]> wrote:
  [...]
  > match;              # all defaults (pattern is /\w+/?)
  > match /pat/;        # match $_
  > match /pat/, $str;  # match $str
  > match /pat/, @strs; # match any of @strs
  >
  > subst;              # like s///, pretty useless :-)
  > subst /pat/new/;    # sub on $_
  > subst /pat/new/, $str;  # sub on $str
  > subst /pat/new/, @strs; # return array of modified strings
  [...]
  > However, it is worth consideration, in light of RFC 138 and many other
  > issues. If we did eliminate =~, I think something like this would work
  > pretty well in its place. If anyone thinks this is an idea worthy of an
  > RFC (the more I look at it the better it looks, but I'm biased :), let
  > me know. Although we'd probably need something better than "subst".
  > Maybe just "m" and "s" still.

I think it is worth a RFC.  I like:

m /pat/;                  # match $_
m /pat/, $str;            # match $str
m /pat/, @strs;           # match any of @strs returning count in scalar
                          # context, matching strings in array context
m /pat/, @strs, $number;  # match any of first $number ($number > 0)
                          #           or last  $number ($number < 0) @strs
                          # returning count in scalar context, matching
                          # strings in array context

s /pat/new/;                  # sub on $_
s /pat/new/, $str;            # sub on $str
s /pat/new/, @strs;           # sub on @strs returning count in scalar context,
                              # changed strings in array context
s /pat/new/, @strs, $number;  # sub any of first $number ($number > 0)
                              #         or last  $number ($number < 0) @strs
                              # returning count in scalar context, changed
                              # strings in array context

Mark