Re: trouble with pattern, character collections

On Monday, February 18, 2013 4:38:56 PM UTC-6, MarcWeber wrote:
>
> So why should anybody write [^\n] if you can use '.'? So why make [^\n]
>
> behave the same way?

Sometimes the meaning is clearer.

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:

/[^\n]\&[a-f0-9\n]\+

which is equivalent to, but clearer in meaning than:

/.\&[a-f0-9\n]\+

--
--
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@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.