SPUG:m,n -- why?

[Michael R. Wolf]

Tim Maher <tim at consultix-inc.com> writes:

> On Sat, Mar 15, 2003 at 12:45:27AM -0800, Shawn Wagner wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 14, 2003 at 11:24:15PM -0800, Michael R. Wolf wrote:
> > > 
> > > Does anyone know the historical roots of "n" and "m" for "min" and
> > > "max" in the regex quantifiers?  I can never get a mnemonic for which
> > > is which.  (Of course, the min is to the left of the max.)  Perhaps if
> > > I know it's roots, I'll remember.
> > > 
> > 
> > My guesses.
> > 
> > >From the ed manpage:
> > ---
> > \{n,m\}
> > \{n,\}
> > \{n\} 
> 
> You're looking at a Linux re-write of the ed manpage.  In my 1982
> Western Electric UNIX User's Manual, and all other Bell Labs
> documentation on the subject, it's shown as \{m,n\}.  What's
> the difference?  The erroneous rewrite, by ruining the alphabetical
> ordering, suggests mneomonics for the letters that don't apply (see
> my early message on the Fortran connection).

Cut from Apocolypse 5:
 {n,m}                 <n,m>                 # assert repeat count
 {$n,$m}               <$n,$m>               # indirect repeat counts


Perhaps I opened my eyes for the first time last night.  I had always
thought I j

The 1st edition of the camel uses
  {n,m}
  {n,}
  {n}

The 3rd edition of the camel uses
  {MIN,MAX}
  {MIN,}
  {COUNT}

I thought I'd always seen {m,n}, but perhaps that's not true.  I guess
I saw what I wanted to see, not what was really there.

Maybe they can me with a mnemonic for spelling mnemonic.  Oops, that
won't work...  :-)

-- 
Michael R. Wolf
    All mammals learn by playing!
        MichaelRunningWolf at att.net