Now for a quick break along the lines of “Obvious in retrospect: Duh”.
I knew exactly what I wanted, to find the needle(s) in a VERY large stack
(thousands upon thousands of lines of code).
However, I was sidetracked from simplicity by the siren songs of sophisticated
technology (fabulous ways
Thank you for asking the question in the first place. It was my first time
putting such devices into action, I really got interested in them !
JC
> On Apr 16, 2018, at 23:15, F. Alfredo Rego wrote:
>
> Jean-Christophe, Dave, Chris,
>
> Great suggestions.
>
> What Chris suggested worked on al
I get my expression mixed up. What I meant was:
as DAVE mentioned:
Positional assertions are great, but why use them if you don’t have to,
especially look-behinds, which can’t have variable string lengths?
I need to get some sleep ;-)
Thanks.
Alfredo
> On Apr 16, 2018, at 8:15 AM, F. Alfr
On 04/16/2018, at 01:59, F. Alfredo Rego mailto:f.alfredor...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> I’m almost there, but not quite, because I’m interested in the UNCOMMENTED
> #defines, such as line 5 here:
Hey Alfredo,
What you really want here is a negative lookahead assertion.
^(?>(?:(?!//).)*#define.+)
I
How about
^#define
or, if some might be indented,
^\h*#define
Positional assertions are great, but why use them if you don't have to,
especially look-behinds, which can't have variable string lengths?
On Sunday, April 15, 2018 at 6:35:59 PM UTC-4, Alfredo wrote:
>
> I’m trying to find all “enab
> On Apr 16, 2018, at 15:59, F. Alfredo Rego wrote:
>
> Weird happenings, indeed.
>
> I’m almost there, but not quite, because I’m interested in the UNCOMMENTED
> #defines, such as line 5 here:
>
> However, your suggested search pattern produces the COMMENTED #defines (all
> lines EXCEPT li
It looks like you forgot a space.
But it's weird, because I can match (? On Apr 16, 2018, at 7:35, F. Alfredo Rego wrote:
>
> I’m trying to find all “enabled” defines such as this:
>
> #define _some_enabled_define_
>
> while excluding all “disabled” (commented) defines such as this:
>
>
