[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <871roj1v05.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de>
Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2020 15:10:34 +0200
From: Florian Weimer <fw@...eb.enyo.de>
To: "liheng \(P\)" <liheng40@...wei.com>
Cc: Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@...t70.net>, "musl\@lists.openwall.com" <musl@...ts.openwall.com>, Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>, "Xiangrui \(Euler\)" <rui.xiang@...wei.com>, Lizefan <lizefan@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: regex Back reference matching result not same as glibc and tre.
* liheng:
> But my point is that why pat[] = "(.?).?\\1" to match "aba" in
> extended regular expression mode that success in glibc and failed in
> musl? Are musl-regex and glibc-regex different?
They are different. Nowadays, accepting backreferences for extended
regular expressions is probably a bug: it prevents certain strategies
for implementing regular expressions because they are not, in fact,
regular.
The glibc implementation is problematic for several reasons. I cannot
recommend to use it as a reference.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
