FYI, Original link: https://github.com/mikehaertel/minrx/issues/12#issuecomment-2702534742
> 下面是被转发的邮件： > > 发件人: mikehaertel <[email protected]> > 主题: 回复：[mikehaertel/minrx] Support new POSIX 2024 non-greedy repetition > operators ?? *? and +?. (Issue #12) > 日期: 2025年3月6日 GMT+8 10:01:04 > 收件人: mikehaertel/minrx <[email protected]> > 抄送: dannyniu <[email protected]>, Manual <[email protected]> > 回复给: mikehaertel/minrx > <reply+ahpjzmg4bbafv3zvd2l3sigf2trobevbnhhjhxv...@reply.github.com> > > MinRX currently matches the specific (aaa??)* example in the proposed new > wording, but does so for reasons that I think are accidental. > I personally think the most desirable behaviour for (aaa?)* against "aaaaa" > would be for the first instance of the parenthesized subexpression to match > aa (because that's minimal), but then the second instance should match aaa, > because that results in the longest match for the outer enclosing *, and aaa > is certainly a legal match to aaa??. > Throughout POSIX regular expressions there has been a theme that optimizing > the overall match of outermost-enclosing constructs takes precedence over > optimizing the matches for inner enclosed subpatterns, and I think Geoff > Clare's proposed new wording violates the principle of least surprise in that > regard. > I've tried several possible definitions for what minimal repetitions should > mean, and all the definitions I've experimented with so far turn out to have > cases with surprising behavior. I've found obvious bugs in both TRE as well > as the Apple matcher based on TRE. I would say that Apple has fixed a number > of bugs compared to the github version of TRE (I've been using > http://github.com/laurikari/tre.git for reference, but I'm not sure what the > most actively-maintained non-Apple version of TRE is). > I hope the POSIX committee will not rush to incorporate this proposed change, > and instead give implementations time to fix their bugs and users time to > come to consensus on what the "right thing" is. > — > — > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe. > You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message ID: > <mikehaertel/minrx/issues/12/[email protected]>
