| FazBrowse GitHub Viewer | Trending | | Home |
| Tools: [Download Repo ZIP] [Original HTTPS Page] |
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
| Back | FazBrowse Home | New Git URL |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Choose a reason Spam Abuse Off Topic Outdated Duplicate Resolved Low QualityI feel we're using too many different verbs for same idea: "are replaced by", "[back]refer[ence]", "uses", "inserts", "converted to", "substitutes in"...
Any advice welcome!
Technically, describing these as "backreference"s is inexact: backreferences in RE assert equality while matching — here we copy the captured text into replacement. And the syntaxes are somewhat different (see "Ways to reference it" table).
However, I suspect readers do think of them as flip sides of same idea, and the doc uses "refer" in both senses widely...
And for \20 inability to express \g<20> vs \g<2>0 distinction 👇 I had trouble phrasing it as well in other ways (perhaps because "reference" doubles as a noun).
Dropping "substitutes" would be a shame because that's the one place we show what the function name stands for 😐 Ideally we'd use it in opening sentence, but that sounds clumsy in my head.
Sorry, something went wrong.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.