On Tue, Apr 11, 2023 at 3:11 PM Paul Eggert <egg...@cs.ucla.edu> wrote: > > On 4/10/23 23:47, Carlo Arenas wrote: > > The original code was done in a way that would be useful during > > porting, but that would hinder future work unnecessarily. > > Thanks, but wouldn't the attached patch be better?
Yes. but I would probably prefer voiding the return value to make it explicit. > If I understand you > correctly, we can simply ignore pcre2_jit_compile failure as the search > will still succeed (albeit perhaps more slowly). correct. Carlo
