On Thu, 17 Apr 2003 22:12:59 +0900, Dave Thomas wrote:
> I know this has been discussed at length, but could I put in a
> vote not to warn on /]/. I now have a lot of legacy code that
> generates warnings, and for the life of me I can't see a good
> reason for it. It's a bit like generating warnings for characters
> inside strings:
> 
> "1) Break 3 eggs in a bowl"
> 
> recipe:1 warning - unmatched closing parenthesis in string
> 
> The ']' in a regexp is a terminator, and is not otherwise special.
> Why should it need to be escaped?

I agree. vim recognises a bare ] properly, and I do a lot of my
regexp testing in vim (perhaps not a good idea, but...). vim, in
fact, recognises /[/, /[]/, and /]/ as valid character searches.
/[]]/ is the same as /]/ or /[\]]/. I'm not sure how hard this would
be, but aside from /[]]/, I don't think that any of these
would/should be problematic.

-austin
-- Austin Ziegler, austin / halostatue.ca on 2003.04.17 at 12:20:08