Hi, PCRE is the "reference implementation" for regular expressions. There is a C version, and it includes a C++ binding (pcrecpp) originally developed by Google. IIRC there are a few cases where PCRE exhibits exponential complexity. I have used pcrecpp in a few projects and it is really easy to use, even easier than QRegExp.
Then there are a few implementations more. Google developed one called re2 ( http://code.google.com/p/re2/ ) that is allegedly faster and leaner than PCRE. How does it cope with those cases where PCRE had exponential complexity? It does not implement them. About the others, I do not have any experience. On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 9:31 PM, Giuseppe D'Angelo <[email protected]> wrote: > I think maybe it's better to continue the discussion on a separate thread? > > Apparently everyone agrees that QRegExp needs improvements and fixups, > but what exactly are the expectations for the default regexp engine > for Qt5? Since (apparently) the discussion is still going on, it seems > to me that no consensus has been reached yet. > > So, please, discuss: what are the features people want to be supported > in 5.0? What to do with the current engine (keep it as the default in > order not to break anything, or change it to the RegExp2 > implementation, or overhaul it, etc.)? Did anyone do some research > with an alternative engine implementation (PCRE, ICU, V8, etc.) and > can provide some results? > > Cheers, > -- > Giuseppe D'Angelo > _______________________________________________ > Qt5-feedback mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.qt.nokia.com/mailman/listinfo/qt5-feedback > -- Pau Garcia i Quiles http://www.elpauer.org (Due to my workload, I may need 10 days to answer) _______________________________________________ Qt5-feedback mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt.nokia.com/mailman/listinfo/qt5-feedback
