136263Re: trouble with pattern, character collections
- Feb 19, 2013On Monday, February 18, 2013 4:38:56 PM UTC-6, MarcWeber wrote:
>Sometimes the meaning is clearer.
> So why should anybody write [^\n] if you can use '.'? So why make [^\n]
> behave the same way?
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.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>