[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: Patterns: Why are anchors not character classes?
- From: Dirk Laurie <dirk.laurie@...>
- Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2015 09:50:02 +0200
2015-07-19 22:01 GMT+02:00 Sean Conner <sean@conman.org>:
> I think I was confused because
>
> ("a"):match "[%%-a]"
>
> worked, but in playing with it further, it seems that this created a class
> of three characters, '%', '-' and 'a'. Wierd.
>From the Manual:
The interaction between ranges and classes is not defined. Therefore,
patterns like [%a-z] or [a-%%] have no meaning.
- References:
- Re: Patterns: Why are anchors not character classes?, John Hind
- Re: Patterns: Why are anchors not character classes?, Dirk Laurie
- Re: Patterns: Why are anchors not character classes?, Rena
- Re: Patterns: Why are anchors not character classes?, Tom N Harris
- Re: Patterns: Why are anchors not character classes?, Rena
- Re: Patterns: Why are anchors not character classes?, Soni L.
- Re: Patterns: Why are anchors not character classes?, Sean Conner
- Re: Patterns: Why are anchors not character classes?, Soni L.
- Re: Patterns: Why are anchors not character classes?, Sean Conner
- Re: Patterns: Why are anchors not character classes?, Roberto Ierusalimschy
- Re: Patterns: Why are anchors not character classes?, Sean Conner
