Comments on: Non-capturing groups in a regexp http://www.kryogenix.org/days/2008/06/17/non-capturing-groups-in-a-regexp scratched tallies on the prison wall Mon, 01 Dec 2008 22:16:35 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.5 By: Dave http://www.kryogenix.org/days/2008/06/17/non-capturing-groups-in-a-regexp#comment-122509 Dave Tue, 16 Sep 2008 12:38:27 +0000 http://www.kryogenix.org/days/?p=1515#comment-122509 I spent a few hours reading this all the way through. Need to practice it, but I'm at least at Geek Factor 8 now. http://www.regular-expressions.info/tutorial.html I spent a few hours reading this all the way through. Need to practice it, but I’m at least at Geek Factor 8 now.

http://www.regular-expressions.info/tutorial.html

]]> By: eTM http://www.kryogenix.org/days/2008/06/17/non-capturing-groups-in-a-regexp#comment-121254 eTM Thu, 19 Jun 2008 22:50:21 +0000 http://www.kryogenix.org/days/?p=1515#comment-121254 But its not longer cool. Therefore it died. But its not longer cool. Therefore it died.

]]> By: MattW http://www.kryogenix.org/days/2008/06/17/non-capturing-groups-in-a-regexp#comment-121240 MattW Thu, 19 Jun 2008 09:09:29 +0000 http://www.kryogenix.org/days/?p=1515#comment-121240 Perl 6 actually still uses ( ) as a capturing group - non-capturing groups got promoted to [ ], which of course means character classes lost that prime position, but they were only demoted to which fits quite nicely with the other things you can put inside which all seem to be subrule-ish. Also, Perl 6 development never died, and I don't see why people are saying it seems to have died when it's currently going faster than ever. Parrot's in pretty good shape, and Rakudo, the Perl 6 compiler for Parrot, is progressing quite rapidly now that most of the language is defined and some nice people have donated funding for part-time development. Perl 6 actually still uses ( ) as a capturing group - non-capturing groups got promoted to [ ], which of course means character classes lost that prime position, but they were only demoted to which fits quite nicely with the other things you can put inside which all seem to be subrule-ish.

Also, Perl 6 development never died, and I don’t see why people are saying it seems to have died when it’s currently going faster than ever. Parrot’s in pretty good shape, and Rakudo, the Perl 6 compiler for Parrot, is progressing quite rapidly now that most of the language is defined and some nice people have donated funding for part-time development.

]]> By: Giacomo http://www.kryogenix.org/days/2008/06/17/non-capturing-groups-in-a-regexp#comment-121227 Giacomo Wed, 18 Jun 2008 11:14:49 +0000 http://www.kryogenix.org/days/?p=1515#comment-121227 eTM, thanks for the cheatsheet! very useful indeed eTM, thanks for the cheatsheet! very useful indeed

]]> By: eTM http://www.kryogenix.org/days/2008/06/17/non-capturing-groups-in-a-regexp#comment-121220 eTM Tue, 17 Jun 2008 19:17:24 +0000 http://www.kryogenix.org/days/?p=1515#comment-121220 http://www.ilovejackdaniels.com/regular_expressions_cheat_sheet.pdf It's only one page, we assumed that your attention span is big enough for 1 page. http://www.ilovejackdaniels.com/regular_expressions_cheat_sheet.pdf
It’s only one page, we assumed that your attention span is big enough for 1 page.

]]> By: Stoffe http://www.kryogenix.org/days/2008/06/17/non-capturing-groups-in-a-regexp#comment-121219 Stoffe Tue, 17 Jun 2008 18:13:52 +0000 http://www.kryogenix.org/days/?p=1515#comment-121219 I use this all the time, and have done so for years. And so does everyone once they find out about it. In fact, Perl 6 regexps acknowledges that this is such a common case that (?:) does not make any sense huffman-wise and shortens it to (). Or at least that's how I remember it. Capturing groups aren't shafted all the way down to (?:) though but something smarter. I don't really remember, as Perl 6 development seemed to die years ago. Too bad, because the design had a lot of great thinkings like that, which other languages could have picked up even if you don't like Perl - it's always been one of the leader languages in that way. I use this all the time, and have done so for years. And so does everyone once they find out about it.

In fact, Perl 6 regexps acknowledges that this is such a common case that (?:) does not make any sense huffman-wise and shortens it to (). Or at least that’s how I remember it. Capturing groups aren’t shafted all the way down to (?:) though but something smarter.

I don’t really remember, as Perl 6 development seemed to die years ago. Too bad, because the design had a lot of great thinkings like that, which other languages could have picked up even if you don’t like Perl - it’s always been one of the leader languages in that way.

]]> By: Laszlo http://www.kryogenix.org/days/2008/06/17/non-capturing-groups-in-a-regexp#comment-121217 Laszlo Tue, 17 Jun 2008 17:47:35 +0000 http://www.kryogenix.org/days/?p=1515#comment-121217 I want this every time i use REs, and I just assumed such a thing didn't exist. This is definitely a contender for the most useful thing I've learned this month. I want this every time i use REs, and I just assumed such a thing didn’t exist. This is definitely a contender for the most useful thing I’ve learned this month.

]]> By: uuuuuh http://www.kryogenix.org/days/2008/06/17/non-capturing-groups-in-a-regexp#comment-121216 uuuuuh Tue, 17 Jun 2008 17:36:28 +0000 http://www.kryogenix.org/days/?p=1515#comment-121216 Heh, that's geek factor seven at best. Geek factor nine doesn't start before mastering lookahead and lookbehind regular expressions. Heh, that’s geek factor seven at best. Geek factor nine doesn’t start before mastering lookahead and lookbehind regular expressions.

]]> By: sil http://www.kryogenix.org/days/2008/06/17/non-capturing-groups-in-a-regexp#comment-121215 sil Tue, 17 Jun 2008 15:48:09 +0000 http://www.kryogenix.org/days/?p=1515#comment-121215 chuck: ha! Touche. You are right to bring that up, and well put. What can I say other than: I won't beat you for pointing out stuff like this. chuck: ha! Touche. You are right to bring that up, and well put. What can I say other than: I won’t beat you for pointing out stuff like this.

]]> By: chuck http://www.kryogenix.org/days/2008/06/17/non-capturing-groups-in-a-regexp#comment-121214 chuck Tue, 17 Jun 2008 15:46:51 +0000 http://www.kryogenix.org/days/?p=1515#comment-121214 Because you beat us when the obvious things are pointed out to you. Because you beat us when the obvious things are pointed out to you.

]]>