Re: Improve `replace-regexp-in-string' ergonomics?

[Lars Ingebrigtsen]

Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes:

> BTW, the current limit on backrefs is just due to a lack of syntax for
> higher-numbered backrefs, so it would be easy to lift this limit: it's
> a small matter of choosing an appropriate syntax and then adjusting the
> code that parses the regexps in regexp.c.

A small matter indeed.  :-/

But perhaps it would be worth doing -- arbitrary limitations like that
goes against everything GNU stands for!

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
   bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no