|
On the other hand, by the time the application gets to production, it will have been tested. It's only in development where a compile time error would be beneficial.
Frequently, a Regular Expression will have been developed and tested in Expresso or similar, so I wouldn't say that a compiler error is that much of a benefit.
|
|
|
|
|
I think your criticisms are valid, but personally, I love regex and state machines, and feel right at home dealing with that sort of code. I'd love to have it opened up for me the way my own regex code generators work in .NET.
But in general, I think you're right. I would consider this feature for my own projects, but might think twice before I'd like to use it in a team development environment for the reasons you mention.
To err is human. Fortune favors the monsters.
|
|
|
|
|
honey the codewitch wrote: I love regex and state machines
I have been using perl since early 90s and never had a co-worker that was as comfortable with regexes as I am. And definitely seen some that didn't know what they were doing.
honey the codewitch wrote: I'd love to have it opened up for me
I wrote my own basic regex (characters classes and such) and modified another. So at least for the basics I know how they work. But also know the complexities and I would not want to program those.
Pretty sure that the source for .Net that implements it right now is available. And I know that the java source code for that is available. The code needed for both are going to be conceptually the same because both use the same regex. Same would be true of javascript.
|
|
|
|
|
Right, but then I'm stuck reimplementing their regex engine if I want this feature.
I have no interest in doing that. I've already done it. It's boring.
To err is human. Fortune favors the monsters.
|
|
|
|
|
Not quite sure what you are after? Nothing stops you from implementing your own regex attributes and source generators - so what is it you are missing? Hooking your own engine into Microsoft's existing attributes?
|
|
|
|
|
Nothing. I'm missing nothing, since Microsoft implemented the feature in the OP.
To err is human. Fortune favors the monsters.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Surely, you are kidding.
In US sign might read "No Trespassing! Violators will be prosecuted!"
"A little time, a little trouble, your better day"
Badfinger
|
|
|
|
|
'Violators' then in male/female
|
|
|
|
|
I have yet to meet a violatrix.
|
|
|
|
|
Don't you pay extra for that?
I’ve given up trying to be calm. However, I am open to feeling slightly less agitated.
I’m begging you for the benefit of everyone, don’t be STUPID.
|
|
|
|
|
Me? Noooo...
|
|
|
|
|
But in many languages the words are always gender specific.
|
|
|
|
|
Nope - our signs read (and yes, I've actually seen a sign that had this)
No Trespassing
Violators will be shot
Survivors will be prosecuted
|
|
|
|
|
I have actually seen one like that as well. I live in TX so these signs come in all sorts of flavors
some with pictures of skulls and crossbones, radioactivity markers, rattlesnakes, scorpions ...
sometimes meant to be funny but always BEWARE STAY OFF ...
"A little time, a little trouble, your better day"
Badfinger
|
|
|
|
|
|
LOL new one
"A little time, a little trouble, your better day"
Badfinger
|
|
|
|
|
I wonder if just listing pronouns would be enough.
Give me coffee to change the things I can and wine for those I can not!
PartsBin an Electronics Part Organizer - An updated version available! JaxCoder.com
Latest Article: Simon Says, A Child's Game
|
|
|
|
|
Give me an idea...
the one who is staying near or the one who is traveling with the horse.
In case of that the sign becomes really big
|
|
|
|
|
In the UK there's that law/rule which states that you have to allow hikers to cross your land, yes? Equestrians as well?
|
|
|
|
|
No.
However we do have a VAST network of public footpaths and bridleways, which must be open at all times (you can apply for a temporary closure for maintenance / safety works). But these date back typically hundreds of years, and are (generally) well established. Occasionally they get missed off maps, then legal searches miss them, and people end up buying a property that has a right of way through the kitchen (yes, that's literally happened). Then there are all sorts of legal wrangles of course.
In parts of the UK there is a "right to roam" which grants general access to roam across wild areas, but there is of course always the obligation not to cause damage to the environment, livestock or crops.
However it's not illegal to go onto someone else's property; "trespass" is the offence of not leaving when requested to do so. In practice though we respect property and if it's private, we leave well alone. Even though we're unlikely to be shot even if we do trespass, and a notice stating that "trespassers will be shot" could well land the landowner up in court, as it's pre-meditated excessive force.
|
|
|
|
|
I saw a sign in South Africa years ago that said: "Trepassers will be shot. Survivors will be shot again.".
|
|
|
|
|
At the old "Lion Country Safari" in Southern California, a few decades ago, their sign read:
No trespassing. Violators will be eaten!
I do not recall ever hearing of trespassers, living or digested.
"Fairy tales do not tell children the dragons exist. Children already know that dragons exist. Fairy tales tell children the dragons can be killed."
- G.K. Chesterton
|
|
|
|
|
DerekT-P wrote: Even though we're unlikely to be shot even if we do trespas
To be fair in the UK one is probably going to have to borrow a gun even before one could consider that.
In the US there is probably one under the rock next to the sign.
|
|
|
|
|
We've over 600,000 firearms in the UK; over 2 million including shotguns. We just don't take them to the supermarket or coffee shop with us...
|
|
|
|