On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 9:04 AM, Antony Scriven [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 31/03/2008, Ian Young [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
I did a couple informal benchmarks when I preparing for
a short talk I gave at my school. The slides are at
On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 5:54 PM, Antony Scriven [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 26/03/2008, Xiaozhou Liu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Vimmers,
During the development of the new regexp, one thing
confuses me a lot: ordered alternation. (e.g. given r.e.
'ab\|abc' and text
Nikolai Weibull wrote:
On Sat, Mar 29, 2008 at 8:14 PM, Bram Moolenaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Considering the recent OOXML fuzz I have lowered my appreciation for
standards considerably.
Considering that much of what people are complaining about regarding
OOXML is things that
Here's another problem with changing behavior in the new engine: we
would have to modify the backtracking engine as well to prevent it
from using ordered alternation. Since our new engine can't handle
certain things and falls back to the old one, they must behave the
same. For example, we can't
Matt Wozniski wrote:
On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 2:47 PM, Bram Moolenaar wrote:
Xiaozhou Liu wrote:
During the development of the new regexp, one thing confuses me a lot:
ordered alternation. (e.g. given r.e. 'ab\|abc' and text 'abc', 'ab'
matched, not 'abc')
I know that
On Sat, Mar 29, 2008 at 8:14 PM, Bram Moolenaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Considering the recent OOXML fuzz I have lowered my appreciation for
standards considerably.
Considering that much of what people are complaining about regarding
OOXML is things that exist in OOXML due to Office's
On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 2:47 PM, Bram Moolenaar wrote:
Xiaozhou Liu wrote:
During the development of the new regexp, one thing confuses me a lot:
ordered alternation. (e.g. given r.e. 'ab\|abc' and text 'abc', 'ab'
matched, not 'abc')
I know that 100% compatibility is one of the
On Fri, 28 Mar 2008 02:09:19 -0400, Matt Wozniski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
For what it's worth, I disagree strongly. This behavior is nothing
but a bug in the existing implementation - a documented bug, but a bug
nonetheless. In this particular case, I definitely think that we
should
On 28/03/2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
Jeffrey Friedel discusses this in his book Mastering
Regular Expressions in chapter 4, section NFA, DFA, and
POSIX. [...] Jeffrey writes: If efficiency
is an issue with a Traditional NFA (and with
backtracking, believe
lurker mode off
From user point of view: does this new way of treating \| bring speed
gains?
\| is one of the most time expensive operators in Vim. If we could have
improvement here I would say - go for it.
lurker mode on
Piotr Żaczek na
Interesting selection of languages to try ;-) You may have picked the
ones with a common regex code base. Russ Cox's article certainly
shows
similar performance/behaviour (See section and graph on Performance at
http://swtch.com/~rsc/regexp/regexp1.html) I wonder what Tcl and
awk do?
On 26/03/2008, Xiaozhou Liu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Vimmers,
During the development of the new regexp, one thing
confuses me a lot: ordered alternation. (e.g. given r.e.
'ab\|abc' and text 'abc', 'ab' matched, not 'abc')
I know that 100% compatibility is one of the project
Antony Scriven wrote:
On 26/03/2008, Xiaozhou Liu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Vimmers,
During the development of the new regexp, one thing
confuses me a lot: ordered alternation. (e.g. given r.e.
'ab\|abc' and text 'abc', 'ab' matched, not 'abc')
I know that 100%
On 27/03/2008, Ben Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Antony Scriven wrote:
[...]
[...] I'd prefer the longest match rather than the
first alternative (as specified by POSIX) [...]
An interesting twist. Can you clarify which behaviour
POSIX specifies (your sentence above is
On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 1:16 PM, Antony Scriven [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 27/03/2008, Ben Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Antony Scriven wrote:
I'd prefer the longest match rather than the
first alternative (as specified by POSIX)
An interesting twist. Can you clarify which
On 27/03/2008, Nikolai Weibull [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 1:16 PM, Antony Scriven
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 27/03/2008, Ben Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Antony Scriven wrote:
I'd prefer the longest match rather than the
first alternative
On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 5:37 PM, Antony Scriven [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 27/03/2008, Nikolai Weibull [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
/left-most/ longest. Big difference.
I thought the `left-most' part was a given and we were
discussing which of the alternatives would be subsequently
On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 8:39 AM, Ben Schmidt
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I prefer the behaviour which I presume you have in your NFA implementation,
of
preferring longer matches, just as * is greedy by default, so would actually
welcome the change.
Yes, that indeed is the behavior of the
On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 5:54 PM, Antony Scriven [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I thought Russ Cox had solved this in the code on his
website, or am I mistaken?
Thanks for the pointer, I'm not aware of this. I'll have a look at the code.
So does anyone really need this feature to be kept?
Xiaozhou Liu wrote:
During the development of the new regexp, one thing confuses me a lot:
ordered alternation. (e.g. given r.e. 'ab\|abc' and text 'abc', 'ab'
matched, not 'abc')
I know that 100% compatibility is one of the project goals. So I try
to keep this feature
in the new
Hi, Bram
On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 2:47 AM, Bram Moolenaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Xiaozhou Liu wrote:
During the development of the new regexp, one thing confuses me a lot:
ordered alternation. (e.g. given r.e. 'ab\|abc' and text 'abc', 'ab'
matched, not 'abc')
I know that
Hi Vimmers,
During the development of the new regexp, one thing confuses me a lot:
ordered alternation. (e.g. given r.e. 'ab\|abc' and text 'abc', 'ab'
matched, not 'abc')
I know that 100% compatibility is one of the project goals. So I try
to keep this feature
in the new regexp. But the
Xiaozhou Liu wrote:
Hi Vimmers,
During the development of the new regexp, one thing confuses me a lot:
ordered alternation. (e.g. given r.e. 'ab\|abc' and text 'abc', 'ab'
matched, not 'abc')
I know that 100% compatibility is one of the project goals. So I try
to keep this feature
in
23 matches
Mail list logo
