* Sam Roberts (Mar 15, 2005 13:00):
> > > My documentation for Regexp::quote(str) says that a copy of str is
> > > returned, yet if str doesn't contain any metacharacters, str itself
> > > is returned.
> > For efficiency, avoiding unnecessary copy is sought. For
> > consistency, and safety (from in-place string modification), all
> > time copy is better. I chose the former. But I'm still open for
> > input.
> I think your choice is right. If people want to duplicate the string,
> they can do str.quote.copy, or something.
You mean Regexp.quote(str).dup
It's of course a problem having to decide whether the dup is necessary
or not. What if there was a need for some quoting and the return-value
of Regexp::quote actually is freshly allocated?
> However, the docs are wrong, they strongly imply a new string will be
> returned.
Yes, this, at least, needs fixing. I'm fine with the semantics of
Regexp::quote, just as long as the documentation agrees with it,
nikolai
--
::: name: Nikolai Weibull :: aliases: pcp / lone-star / aka :::
::: born: Chicago, IL USA :: loc atm: Gothenburg, Sweden :::
::: page: www.pcppopper.org :: fun atm: gf,lps,ruby,lisp,war3 :::
main(){printf(&linux["\021%six\012\0"],(linux)["have"]+"fun"-97);}
|
