On Mo, 2017-12-04 at 16:49 -0500, Chet Ramey wrote:
> The thing is, bash doesn't "implement" its regular expressions, per
> se.
> Bash uses the Posix standard library functions (regcomp/regexec) if
> they
> are available in the C library when it's configured and built. I'm
> not
> wild about
On 12/4/17 1:42 PM, H.-Dirk Schmitt wrote:
> From the 2 replies I unterstand that the implementation in bash is
> correct due to the „official“ standard.
>
> For myself I have solved the issue in my script - but the regular
> expression I developed for my problem are without the 'non-greedy'
>
>From the 2 replies I unterstand that the implementation in bash is
correct due to the „official“ standard.
For myself I have solved the issue in my script - but the regular
expression I developed for my problem are without the 'non-greedy'
operator more difficult to read and maintain. From that
On 12/1/17 12:40 PM, d...@computer42.org wrote:
> Bash Version: 4.4
> Patch Level: 12
> Release Status: release
>
> Description:
> I'm sanitising urls from advertisement crap. As described below I'm getting
> a wrong resolution of parenthesised expression defined with non-greedy
> operator
On Fri, Dec 01, 2017 at 06:40:35PM +0100, d...@computer42.org wrote:
> I'm sanitising urls from advertisement crap. As described below I'm getting
> a wrong resolution of parenthesised expression defined with non-greedy
> operator '?'.
>
Configuration Information [Automatically generated, do not change]:
Machine: x86_64
OS: linux-gnu
Compiler: gcc
Compilation CFLAGS: -DPROGRAM='bash' -DCONF_HOSTTYPE='x86_64'
-DCONF_OSTYPE='linux-gnu' -DCONF_MACHTYPE='x86_64-pc-linux-gnu'
-DCONF_VENDOR='pc' -DLOCALEDIR='/usr/share/locale'
