swzoh wrote: > So, it's not easy at all without impacting hard the performance as > suspected. I was curious how it could detect \r\n before \r then. I > thought it might be something like "[^\r]|\r(?!\n)" which would not > impact performance much as most regex engines use short-cut > evaluation. The natural generalization of it to CRLF might be > [^\r\n]|\r(?!\n)|(?<!\r)\n > > However, it would take twice more time than the first one, I suppose. > What do you think about it?
If you're curious, benchmark it and you'll see how slow your expressions are. In general I do favor using expressions to detect CRLF instead of changing the meaning of newline... this way you won't have to rewrite your expressions if newline-is-crlf isn't available for some reason (it's far from ubiquitous).
