Gavin Kistner <gavin / refinery.com> wrote:
> On Aug 21, 2005, at 1:49 AM, Thorsten Haude wrote:
>> I also wonder why you use a look-ahead, I would rather use a
>> look-behind.
>
> A negative look-behind would be the perfect, simple approach to this
> regex problem. Unfortunately, Ruby's current regexp handler does not
> have such a feature. Fortunately, the regexp handler of the next
> version of Ruby does. Even more fortunately, this future handler
> (Oniguruma) is available now.
>
> So, you can write a more complex regexp/logic to detect your current
> case, or you can get Oniguruma working and use a negative look-behind.

I'd probably use something like /(\w+)\./ and do a programmatic check (or 
use a second RX) that the word before the dot is not one of those no match 
words.

Kind regards

    robert