Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

136263Re: trouble with pattern, character collections

Expand Messages
  • Ben Fritz
    Feb 19, 2013
      On Monday, February 18, 2013 4:38:56 PM UTC-6, MarcWeber wrote:
      > So why should anybody write [^\n] if you can use '.'? So why make [^\n]
      > behave the same way?

      Sometimes the meaning is clearer.

      What if you're searching for a sequence of certain characters including newlines, where the first character is NOT a newline?

      I'd probably want to use:


      which is equivalent to, but clearer in meaning than:


      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.
    • Show all 28 messages in this topic