On Fri, Feb 21, 2003 at 09:00:13AM +0100 I heard the voice of
Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker, and lo! it spake thus:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Fri, 21 Feb 2003
>08:46:31 +0100, Claude Lecommandeur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> claude.lecommandeur> Wouldn't the best solution to have support for
> claude.lecommandeur> decent (perlish) regular expressions :
> claude.lecommandeur>
> claude.lecommandeur> "^(foo|bar)$" "value"
> claude.lecommandeur>
> claude.lecommandeur> regex can do this.
>
> Hmm, in certain cases, that would mean using part of the GNU C
> Library, which is licensed under the LGPL. What would that mean for
> me, distribution-wise?
I don't think it matters; you're _already_ using part of the GNU C
Library in certain cases (i.e., on any system with glibc :). The
regex(3) functions from Henry Spencer aren't [L]GPL'd, and there's also
the choice of PCRE; either, as far as I can tell, are mostly BSD-style
licensed.
I actually did momentarily consider using regular expressions when I
wrote the original patch, but I dismissed it as absurd overkill (and for
_ME_ to pass up on overkill is unusual ;) and just went for
comma-seperated.
Now, one idea is to go to |-seperated lists inside ()'s; sort of
hand-implementing just the (a|b|c) part of regular expressions. Thus,
the code would treat "foo" as it does now, but special-case if the entry
started with a '(' as a |-seperated list. That would work; would take
about 5 minutes to update the code for, would make it perhaps more
obvious what it's doing... And anybody who makes a window class whose
name starts with '(' deserves what they get ;-p
--
Matthew Fuller (MF4839) | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Systems/Network Administrator | http://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/
"The only reason I'm burning my candle at both ends, is because I
haven't figured out how to light the middle yet"
