On Sat, 17 Oct 2009, I wrote:

> If so, the problem is supposed to be solved in 8.00 by the addition of 
> the PCRE_PARTIAL_HARD option, which prefers a partial match over a 
> complete match. However, you have found a bug! In the -RC1 code, neither 
> pcre_exec() nor pcre_dfa_exec() returns PCRE_PARTIAL for the pattern
> "abcd*" when applied to "xxxabcd". I have spotted the error in the code
> in pcre_exec() and will then try to find out what's wrong in
> pcre_dfa_exec().

I believe that I have fixed the problem in both functions. I have 
created a second release candidate which has just this change. It is 
available from

ftp://ftp.csx.cam.ac.uk/pub/software/programming/pcre/Testing/pcre-8.00-RC2.tar.gz
ftp://ftp.csx.cam.ac.uk/pub/software/programming/pcre/Testing/pcre-8.00-RC2.tar.bz2
ftp://ftp.csx.cam.ac.uk/pub/software/programming/pcre/Testing/pcre-8.00-RC2.zip

If you use PCRE_PARTIAL_SOFT (== PCRE_PARTIAL) for "abcd*" with 
"xxxabcd", you get a match, but if you use PCRE_PARTIAL_HARD, you get 
PCRE_PARTIAL returned, meaning "there could be a longer match".

I am still hoping to get the full release out next week, after I have 
dealt with the other issues that have been raised for the RC1 candidate.

Philip

-- 
Philip Hazel

-- 
## List details at http://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/pcre-dev 

Reply via email to