RE: [Expectperl-discuss] quotes around $scalar

[Blackstone, J. D. <jda...@ci...>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Roland Giersig [mailto:RGi...@cp...]
> Sent: Sunday, August 04, 2002 5:00 AM
> To: Blackstone, J. David
> Cc: exp...@li...
> Subject: RE: [Expectperl-discuss] quotes around $scalar
> 
> 
> Quoting "Blackstone, J. David" <jda...@ci...>:
> 
> >   Another thing I meant to say about regexes is I think it would be
> > really cool if we could drop -re altogether.  To my mind it 
> seems like the
> > method should use ref to see if you've passed a qr// regex 
> or a plain
> > scalar.  Of course, my mind doesn't work like anyone else's, and it
> would break
> > backward compatibility.
> 
> Right, and that's why it's not gonna happen.  Please note 
> that with the
> new syntax with callbacks it's already the default:
> 
>   $exp->expect($timeout, 
>                [ "regexp", \&callback ],
>                [ qr/regexp/, \&callback ],);
> 
> And this is the much more powerful syntax, so I personally 
> consider the
> old syntax (where you have to test which regexp index has matched)
> somewhat obsolete and only a beginners drug to get them hooked until
> they realize the full power of callbacks... :-)

  Ah, that makes sense.  I only use the older syntax for very simple
statements, e.g.:
$x->expect($t, "string");
that is, when I want to do the equivalent to TCL/Expect's
expect string


  Of course, with ref $regex, there's no telling what you can do. :)

jdb