Hi!

On Mon, 11 Jun 2001, Yves Arrouye wrote:

> Andreas et al.,
>
> BTW, a way to not break backwards compatibility would be to use another
> character than \ as the magic character for the new syntax. Maybe $ for
> example. So we would keep \1 and \2 meaning what they mean today, but for
> automagic splitting one would use $ to refer to specific "fields".

Yes, I thought about that too.
I also had the '$' character in mind, but then I thought, that some URLs
might use it and so I can't rely on the special meaning of it.

If we can say for sure, that this character won't be used in any URL, then
this might the right solution.
But if not, we might get bug reports with some strange behaviour
associated with that.

For now I'll implement the compatibility mode I suggested in my last mail
(query definitions with only one single \1 get replaced with \0 before
substitution) and submit another patch. It should work without problems
with both, old and new queries, since the case where only the first query
argument should be used, is not vere useful.

>
> YA
> >
>

Bye,
	Andreas