> On 1 Sep 2018, at 00:12, Frank Heckenbach <f.heckenb...@fh-soft.de> wrote: > > Hans Åberg wrote: > >>> I haven't used gcc-8 yet, but how is this relevant? If anything, I >>> expect newer gcc versions to produce more warnings (usually useful) >>> which flex might also suffer from. >> >> Maybe the Flex lexers errors is due to using C89 to compile it or something. > > No, the warnings seemed legit.
It uses "register" which has been deprecated in C++17. >>> Interesting, thanks. Fortunately, my REs are not so complex, so the >>> bug you reported won't affect me and lexing speed is not so >>> important for me, so (at least for now) I can just use the library >>> as is. But if I ever need something more sophisticated, I'll keep >>> this in mind. >> >> If that is what you are using, note that it is recursive, so the function >> stack might overflow. But perhaps the rewrite it someday. > > I don't think my lexing REs should cause much recursion. No nested > repetitions or such. It is in the backtracking, which it does instead of a DFA iteration, in the GCC regex library, that is. Some example in the links I gave illustrate that.
