That's right. It's optional. I think we should remove it unless we have a good reason to keep it. I just think that it's maddening and unnecessary. Perhaps, I am the only one?
On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 7:54 AM Gus Heck <gus.h...@gmail.com> wrote: > I think it's already an optional feature; if you construct the regexp with > explicit syntax flags you can get an instance that won't consider '@' > special. Haven't actually had a need to do that so I'm assuming it works as > documented. > > /** Syntax flag, enables anystring (<code>@</code>). */ > public static final int ANYSTRING = 0x0008; > > > > On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 9:21 PM Marcus Eagan <marcusea...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hi All, >> >> In looking at the Java Docs, our Lucene team noticed that the `@` symbol >> is a reserved character in the Lucene regular expression syntax. >> >> In re-visiting the page in curiosity, I found that the symbol was >> [Optional] for "any string." This came at a surprise because there's a very >> common way to achieve "any string" in `.*`. Is there any compelling reason >> to preserve this tiny vector of complexity? I suspect there may be some >> differences in the constructions of the finite automata produced by `.*` >> and `@` but I am not sure. >> >> If insignificant or non-existent, I suggest we remove `@` from the >> regular expression syntax. >> >> -- >> Marcus Eagan >> >> > > -- > http://www.needhamsoftware.com (work) > http://www.the111shift.com (play) > -- Marcus Eagan