"Steve Murphy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > People have voiced this before; but the cut-down version of RE's that > the matching algorithms allow are fairly fast, both in the new and > the old pattern matching algorithms. >
Steve Your explanation is clear and it seems like a good design choice to exclude support for regular expressions, but what seems odd (maybe a bug in fact) is the specific exclusion of characters +, # and *. It sounds like you're saying: exten => [0-9*#+].,... is invalid, therefore not a bug, and that only numeric parameters such as: exten => [0-6].,... would be valid. If this is correct could you please explain the proper way to match any extension beginning with + such as '+13129842314' without also matching: 'i' Thanks for your input Steve! -Karl > What extension the following: > '3129842314' > '*989' > '+13129842314' > > BUT does not match: > 'i' > 'james' I'd like to see a wildchard character that matches Can support for those characters be added without _______________________________________________ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
