Mike Roberts:
What would the interest level be in an expanded regular expression parser/matcher?
I actually think that including RE support in Scintilla was a mistake. There are several large, high quality regular expression libraries available and it would be better for applications to use one of these. Often an application will be focussed on a particular language or platform and there will be a regular expression library and syntax associated with those that should be used. Its also better if the same library is used for all parts of the application. It is quite difficult to provide a runtime mechanism for Scintilla to choose a library and no one has been sufficiently interested to produce a compile time mechanism. One issue is that libraries often want direct access through a char* rather than indirect access through a function call or direct access to a complex structure like Scintilla's split buffer. Since SciTE uses Scintilla's RE other projects often copy this so if SciTE was changed to use another library then it would be a better example. It would also ensure that the support code (such as WindowAccessor) worked well. I'd be more interested in one of the more complete libraries like PCRE or Boost.Regex but that's a large amount of work and may involve additional dependencies - Boost.Regex prefers using ICU for Unicode... . Too much work for me to look at in the near future. Neil _______________________________________________ Scintilla-interest mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.lyra.org/mailman/listinfo/scintilla-interest
