[pcre-dev] [Bug 2286] New: Documentation Difficulty and Error
https://bugs.exim.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2286 Bug ID: 2286 Summary: Documentation Difficulty and Error Product: PCRE Version: 10.31 (PCRE2) Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Severity: bug Priority: medium Component: Documentation Assignee: p...@hermes.cam.ac.uk Reporter: brady.mcc...@gmail.com CC: pcre-dev@exim.org It has been difficult for me to determine if pcre2 has compile + (optional) study data like pcre1 or just compile data. Presently, the near absence of the word "study" from the documentation and complete absence from the pcre2.h header seems to indicate "no". If it is the case that study data is no longer part of the interface then it would be nice if there were a brief mention to that effect. While trying to figure this out, I noticed what I believe to be an error in the documentation here: https://www.pcre.org/current/doc/html/ Specifically, the function/description: pcre2_get_error_message: Free study data It seems to me these are not in agreement. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. -- ## List details at https://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/pcre-dev
[pcre-dev] (*SKIP:NAME) when (*MARK:NAME) is in assertion
Good day. PCRE documents about SKIP verb with NAME: "When (*SKIP) has an associated name, its behaviour is modified. When it is triggered, the previous path through the pattern is searched for the most recent (*MARK) that has the same name. If one is found, the "bumpalong" advance is to the subject position that corresponds to that (*MARK) instead of to where (*SKIP) was encountered. If no (*MARK) with a matching name is found, the (*SKIP) is ignored." Look please at pcretest listing: PCRE2 version 10.31 2018-02-12 /a(?=.(*:1))(*SKIP:1)(*F)|./ abc 0: a With documented behaviour expected result is: "c", not "a". It seems if mark name is defined in assertion then SKIP with this name is ignored. May be a little docs clarification about this needed. Thanks. -- ## List details at https://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/pcre-dev
Re: [pcre-dev] No capture in nested negative assertions
On 2018-07-07 16:50, ph10 wrote: I decided that the most straightforward approach was to discard all capturing inside negative assertions when the assertion completes. May I suggest alternative approach? It is simple and more consistent. I think Perl use it: Capture is discarded ONLY if it was happen in non-matching branch. -- ## List details at https://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/pcre-dev
