Guillaume Munch wrote: > AFAIR, the ECMAScript regexes are a proper subset of PCRE whereas there > are incompatibilities between POSIX and PCRE. Moreover ECMAScript is the > default for <regex>, so maybe it is better supported across compilers. > This makes ECMAScript the simplest for a transition. > > Is the bug there with g++ 6? I remember Georg saying that the early > implementations of <regex> in gcc were buggy.
The first usable version is in 4.9.0, so <regex> in gcc should not be a problem anymore on any recent distro. > On the other hand I do not remember that dynamically created regexes > were reviewed for adaptation to ECMAScript so maybe there is indeed > something to change, although not (?:. > > Dear Georg, do you remember the same? I do not remember any review of dynamically generated regexes. I also have to admit that dynamically generated regexes are too complicated IMHO (too many levels of indirection). Unfortunately I do not understand the advanced search well enough to propose a better solution. Georg
