[ale] Yet another regex question

[Geoffrey]

Christopher Fowler wrote:
> I guess what I'm asking is if there is a way to catch 'XMI001' instead
> of '%\sXMI001' without using the anchors

Look at the problem the other way around.  Try NOT catching '% XMI001'.
That is, try producing a regex that will catch '% XMI001' in order to 
ignore it.

(perl)

/% / && next;

Often times folks try to put too much into a single regex.  If you need 
more than one, use it.  It's fun to come up with long complex regex's, 
but they are rough 2 years later when you're looking at the code again.

-- 
Until later, Geoffrey