Re^4: regexp class

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^5: regexp class by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Sep 03, 2011 at 08:08 UTC
trivial to disprove.... If it doesn't do ... Sorry, but your disproof has bugs. What "it". If there is no code, there is no "it". The absence of functionality is not a bug. In many cases, it is the most pragmatic, correct solution. Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error. "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority". In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.	[reply]
Re^5: regexp class by ww (Archbishop) on Sep 03, 2011 at 09:41 UTC
Please show me the bugs in my code above.	[reply] [d/l]
Re^6: regexp class by wfsp (Abbot) on Sep 04, 2011 at 11:17 UTC
If your code crashed in a forest and no one was around to hear it, would it make a sound?	[reply]
Re^7: regexp class by pvaldes (Chaplain) on Sep 04, 2011 at 11:44 UTC
maybe a croak...	[reply]
Re^6: regexp class by JavaFan (Canon) on Sep 03, 2011 at 11:37 UTC
Without some sort of specification what code needs to do, it's never possible to point out bugs. Some me your specification, and I'll show you the bugs (unless the specification is "do nothing").	[reply]
Re^7: regexp class (no bugs) by tye (Sage) on Sep 03, 2011 at 15:52 UTC
Adding functionality would be a feature request, not a bug report. The following test suite provides 100% code and feature coverage: `use Test; BEGIN { plan tests => 1 } do '/dev/null'; ok( ! $@ ); # Empty text compiles w/o error # Test all features:` [download] - tye	[reply] [d/l]
Re^8: regexp class (no bugs) by JavaFan (Canon) on Sep 03, 2011 at 18:08 UTC
Re^9: regexp class (no bugs) by tye (Sage) on Sep 04, 2011 at 00:09 UTC
Some notes below your chosen depth have not been shown here


Syntactic Confectionery Delight
	PerlMonks