- boost::regex_relace vs. std::regex_replace: Who is right? - 1 Update
- About C++ style (functions) - 5 Updates
| Marcel Mueller <news.5.maazl@spamgourmet.org>: Jun 18 11:32PM +0200 On 14.06.16 10.31, Ralf Goertz wrote: > tend to think that gcc is right. However, in other programs (like vim > e.g.) it is '\'. So boost might have a point in treating '\' specially. > So who is right? It depends on the specification. Most implementations I know use \1, \2 ... for back references in the pattern and $1, $2 ... in the replacement string. Marcel |
| Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net>: Jun 17 09:12PM -0400 On 6/17/2016 6:52 PM, Stanimir Stamenkov wrote: > ignorant by not stripping it yourself (if the reader doesn't or can't do > it automatically for you), just like you should trim quotes to a sane > minimum, and that can't be automatic. Where does it say it is "mainly for signatures which include more than a simple name"? Citation? RFC's are there for a reason. News readers and email readers use them as standards. Only idiots and trolls ignore them. Which are you?i -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry Stuckle jstucklex@attglobal.net ================== |
| Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net>: Jun 17 09:48PM -0400 On 6/17/2016 6:52 PM, Stanimir Stamenkov wrote: > ignorant by not stripping it yourself (if the reader doesn't or can't do > it automatically for you), just like you should trim quotes to a sane > minimum, and that can't be automatic. Oh, and which RFC(s) define any of these other styles? -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry Stuckle jstucklex@attglobal.net ================== |
| Stanimir Stamenkov <s7an10@netscape.net>: Jun 18 11:09AM +0300 Fri, 17 Jun 2016 21:12:17 -0400, /Jerry Stuckle/: >> minimum, and that can't be automatic. > Where does it say it is "mainly for signatures which include more than a > simple name"? Citation? Just use your brains. > RFC's are there for a reason. News readers and email readers use them > as standards. Only idiots and trolls ignore them. Which are you?i Fri, 17 Jun 2016 21:48:53 -0400, /Jerry Stuckle/: > Oh, and which RFC(s) define any of these other styles? Which RFC(s) prohibits using them? Which RFC(s) prohibits writing in a style not defined in a RFC? Anyway, I'm off to something more productive. -- Stanimir |
| Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net>: Jun 18 10:55AM -0400 On 6/18/2016 4:09 AM, Stanimir Stamenkov wrote: >> Where does it say it is "mainly for signatures which include more than a >> simple name"? Citation? > Just use your brains. Not much of a citation. >> Oh, and which RFC(s) define any of these other styles? > Which RFC(s) prohibits using them? Which RFC(s) prohibits writing in a > style not defined in a RFC? Anyway, I'm off to something more productive. RFC's define what IS to be used. Not what IS NOT to be used. They define standards, and those who do not follow the standards have no right to complain. So now you've answered the question. You are both an idiot and a troll. Go back to playing with your Legos. They're more your speed. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry Stuckle jstucklex@attglobal.net ================== |
| Real Troll <real.troll@trolls.com>: Jun 18 05:44PM +0100 On 18/06/2016 15:55, Jerry Stuckle wrote: > So now you've answered the question. You are both an idiot and a troll. Are you sure dickhead? |
| You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to comp.lang.c+++unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. |
No comments:
Post a Comment