From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from nexus.yorku.ca ([130.63.9.66]) by hawkwind.utcs.toronto.edu with SMTP id <2789>; Tue, 16 Mar 1993 15:04:05 -0500 Received: from ursa.sis.yorku.ca ([130.63.245.12]) by nexus.yorku.ca with SMTP id <9225>; Tue, 16 Mar 1993 15:00:44 -0500 Received: from localhost.yorku.ca by sis.yorku.ca (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA25626; Tue, 16 Mar 93 14:57:15 EST Message-Id: <9303161957.AA25626@sis.yorku.ca> To: sam-fans@hawkwind.utcs.toronto.edu Subject: Re: huh? Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1993 14:57:14 -0500 From: "Ozan S. Yigit" Scott Schwartz wrote: > > i believe the difference is that ``x'' without a pattern > > immediately following it uses an implicit /^.*\n/ > > That convention is somewhat inconsistent, since spaces are ignored > elsewhere. Now that @ is no longer used for fat-dot, maybe it could be > used instead. I.e. use ``x@'' instead of ``x '', to mean x/^.*\n/ > and ignore spaces between tokens. I note "l" (for "line") is unused: [addr]x -> [addr]l ?? oz