On Thu, 2007-03-22 at 22:21 +0100, Bram Moolenaar wrote:
>
> Adding a third matcher won't happen soon, and is a big change. It's not
> really needed to prepare for that.
>
> The disadvantage of using a function pointer is that in the place where
> it's used you only see:
>
> myprog->e
Nikolai Weibull wrote:
> On 3/22/07, Asiri Rathnayake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > As you might know, the reg_comp() method is called twice when compiling
> > a r.e; first to determine the size of the compiled expression and then
> > to actually compile it. I was thinking if this can be used
On Thu, 2007-03-22 at 09:26 +0100, Nikolai Weibull wrote:
> On 3/22/07, Asiri Rathnayake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > As you might know, the reg_comp() method is called twice when compiling
> > a r.e; first to determine the size of the compiled expression and then
> > to actually compile it. I
On 3/22/07, Asiri Rathnayake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
As you might know, the reg_comp() method is called twice when compiling
a r.e; first to determine the size of the compiled expression and then
to actually compile it. I was thinking if this can be used to our
advantage, while on the first p
Nikolai,
As you might know, the reg_comp() method is called twice when compiling
a r.e; first to determine the size of the compiled expression and then
to actually compile it. I was thinking if this can be used to our
advantage, while on the first pass, we look for occurrences of special
character
This mail bounced off for some reason, I'm repeating it. Sorry if you've
already got this.
-
Hi Bram, Nikolai, All,
I think the best way to understand current implementation of regxp is to
first go through Henry Spencer's original regxp implementation ( thanks
nikolai ). It's ver
On 3/20/07, Asiri Rathnayake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I went through the regxp code and have a few questions...
First, Why use this kind of a coding scheme and encode patterns rather
than using a state diagram ? ( Performance/Memory ? ).
Because that's how Henry Spencer did it. I don't kno
Hi Bram,Nikolai,
I went through the regxp code and have a few questions...
First, Why use this kind of a coding scheme and encode patterns rather
than using a state diagram ? ( Performance/Memory ? ). Secondly, is it a
requirement that the new implementation has to follow the same method ?
I mean
On Mon, Mar 19, 2007 at 01:49:53PM +0100, Nikolai Weibull wrote:
> On 1/1/07, Asiri Rathnayake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >On Mon, 2007-03-19 at 11:55 +0100, Nikolai Weibull wrote:
> >> On 3/19/07, Asiri Rathnayake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> > Hi Bram, Nicolai,
> >>
> >> A 'k' would be great
On 1/1/07, Asiri Rathnayake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, 2007-03-19 at 11:55 +0100, Nikolai Weibull wrote:
> On 3/19/07, Asiri Rathnayake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi Bram, Nicolai,
>
> A 'k' would be greatly appreciated.
I'm really really sorry, won't happen again...
Hehe, don't ta
On Mon, 2007-03-19 at 11:55 +0100, Nikolai Weibull wrote:
> On 3/19/07, Asiri Rathnayake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi Bram, Nicolai,
>
> A 'k' would be greatly appreciated.
I'm really really sorry, won't happen again...
> > I'm unable to grasp the description ( attachment ) given in the reg
On 3/19/07, Asiri Rathnayake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Bram, Nicolai,
A 'k' would be greatly appreciated.
I'm unable to grasp the description ( attachment ) given in the regxp.c
file. For a moment they seem like NFA fragments for operators |,+,*
Well, yes, that's what they are. The dia
Hi Bram, Nicolai,
I'm unable to grasp the description ( attachment ) given in the regxp.c
file. For a moment they seem like NFA fragments for operators |,+,* and
so on, but then again I'm in doubt ( specially i don't understand what a
node in this context is ). A little help is greatly appreciated
13 matches
Mail list logo
