136208Re: trouble with pattern, character collections
- Feb 18, 2013On 2013-02-18 20:28, Marc Weber wrote:
> > I thought 7.3.796 fixed this so [^\n] is the same as '.'? Isn'tI seem to recall a similar thread a while back on similar topics of
> > that the case?
> Rererad my message. My point is that [^\n] should *not* be the same
> as '.' following the principle of least surprise.
> Or tell me why there should be two ways to express the same - but no
> sane way to express [^\n].
> If its not possible to make [^\n] behave the way you expect there
> should be an error instead.
newlines inside negated character classes. [digging] yup:
I don't know if my testing proves useful, or if the continuation of
the thread offers you anything valuable, but at least it's not the
first time this has been bumped against.
You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "vim_use" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to vim_use+unsubscribe@....
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>