On Wed, 19 Jun 2002, David M. Kaplan wrote:
> I have found that !~ and !~* do not match the null string even when one
> would expect them to. I am not sure if this is how it is supposed to
> work or if this is an error. If this is how it works, I can't figure
> out where it is states in the documentation.
I think it's probably working correctly. NULL is an unknown value,
you can't necessarily know whether or not it'll match the pattern so
you should get an unknown back in both cases since NOT unknown is
itself unknown.