«

>>>>> "JWK" == John W Krahn <> writes:

JWK> Ben Morrow wrote:
>>
>> One of the things it can be is a regex, and there is a special
>> operator '=~' in Perl which means 'match this regex against this
>> string'.

JWK> Actually =~ is the binding operator and if used with tr/// there is no
JWK> regex involved.

that is a good point that is not mentioned often enough. but what does
this do?

'abc' =~ ( foo() . $bar ) ;

uri

--
Uri Guttman ------ -------- http://www.stemsystems.com
--Perl Consulting, Stem Development, Systems Architecture, Design and Coding-
Search or Offer Perl Jobs ---------------------------- http://jobs.perl.org

Uri Guttman wrote:
>
> >>>>> "JWK" == John W Krahn <> writes:
>
> JWK> Ben Morrow wrote:
> >>
> >> One of the things it can be is a regex, and there is a special
> >> operator '=~' in Perl which means 'match this regex against this
> >> string'.
>
> JWK> Actually =~ is the binding operator and if used with tr/// there is no
> JWK> regex involved.
>
> that is a good point that is not mentioned often enough. but what does
> this do?
>
> 'abc' =~ ( foo() . $bar ) ;

Something similar to:

'abc' =~ /@{[ foo() ]}$bar/ ;


John
--
use Perl;
program
fulfillment

>>>>> "JWK" == John W Krahn <> writes:

JWK> Uri Guttman wrote:
>>
>> >>>>> "JWK" == John W Krahn <> writes:
>>
JWK> Ben Morrow wrote:
>> >>
>> >> One of the things it can be is a regex, and there is a special
>> >> operator '=~' in Perl which means 'match this regex against this
>> >> string'.
>>
JWK> Actually =~ is the binding operator and if used with tr/// there is no
JWK> regex involved.
>>
>> that is a good point that is not mentioned often enough. but what does
>> this do?
>>
>> 'abc' =~ ( foo() . $bar ) ;

JWK> Something similar to:

JWK> 'abc' =~ /@{[ foo() ]}$bar/ ;

correct (except for the context. in mine foo() is called in scalar
context and yours calls it in list context).

my point is that =~ is the binding operator but given just an expression
on the right side (no //, m//, s/// or tr///) it will assume m// for the
expression and compile it as such. so =~ has some regex flavor to it as
well as binding. but i do dislike it being called the regex op (mostly
by newbies who don't know about tr/// and that it is not a regex op).

uri

--
Uri Guttman ------ -------- http://www.stemsystems.com
--Perl Consulting, Stem Development, Systems Architecture, Design and Coding-
Search or Offer Perl Jobs ---------------------------- http://jobs.perl.org

* Don Kim <>:
> "James Willmore" <> wrote in message
> news: phia.net...

[...]
> > Being an owner of the book mentioned I can say this -
> > unless you're going to be doing what the author has done
> > with regular expressions, save your money. If you
> > *must* have a book, get the pocket book by the same
> > title ($12(?) versus $30(?) for the full book).

> Actually, I already purchased the book, but I got it used
> for $12 so it was worth it. I hear you though, I'm sick
> of buying books only to find it wasn't useful to me.

http://iain.truskett.id.au/MiniOwlBook for my view on the
pocket reference.

As you have "Mastering Regular Expressions" (there are 2
editions and I'm not sure which you have, but for beginners
both are good) you have one of the best introductions to
regex around. If you can follow the book, you'll not only
know regex, you'll _understand_ regex and how they work and
why they give the results they do. Which is far better than
just knowing the syntax.

If you're going to learn Perl, it's good to learn regex as
well. Most tutorials cover them fairly early on.

If you're going to learn regex, you may as well learn Perl
as it's a great language to use to play with regex, and has
one of the best implementations.


cheers,
--
Iain.