Re: Why non-escaped newlines are prohibited in single-quoted string literals?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Subject: Re: Why non-escaped newlines are prohibited in single-quoted string literals?
From: Charles Heywood <vandor2012@...>
Date: 2017年1月30日 04:47:28 +0000

\[[ works fine IMO; \[==[ so there's no debate on whether it should be before or after the equals. i'm probably going to write a really quick function `e` to shove somewhere that works like e[[te\nxt]] now that i think about this.

On Sun, Jan 29, 2017 at 6:42 PM Egor Skriptunoff <egor.skriptunoff@gmail.com> wrote:

On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 1:34 AM, Soni L. <fakedme@gmail.com> wrote:
I wish we had something slightly different:

[\[can\nuse\nescape\ncodes\nhere]]

[===\[...]===]
or
[\===[...]===]
?

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Why non-escaped newlines are prohibited in single-quoted string literals?, Soni L.

References:
- Why non-escaped newlines are prohibited in single-quoted string literals?, Egor Skriptunoff
- Re: Why non-escaped newlines are prohibited in single-quoted string literals?, Soni L.
- Re: Why non-escaped newlines are prohibited in single-quoted string literals?, Egor Skriptunoff

Prev by Date: Re: Why non-escaped newlines are prohibited in single-quoted string literals?
Next by Date: Re: Why non-escaped newlines are prohibited in single-quoted string literals?
Previous by thread: Re: Why non-escaped newlines are prohibited in single-quoted string literals?
Next by thread: Re: Why non-escaped newlines are prohibited in single-quoted string literals?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread