On Dec 18, 2007 3:31 AM, Pau Garcia i Quiles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I also took a look at the IF command implementation and I'm going to > implement PCREs there, too: IF(variable PCRE_MATCHES pcre_regex) / > IF(string PCRE_MATCHES pcre_regex).
Cool! I wonder if a GLOBAL property CMAKE_PCRE_DEFAULT would be appropriate at some point, after PCRE is proven. > The most difficult part is understanding the really odd (at least to > me) behavior of REGEX_MATCH and REGEX_REPLACE in current CMake (I'd > like PCRE to mimic as much as possible). What is odd? MATCH matches the 1st match. REGEX REPLACE replaces all the matches. It's odd that they're not parallel, but they're not odd notions in and of themselves. > There is one thing which discourages me, though: nobody from Kitware > commented on the interest of PCREs, what the "deadline" for PCREs to > be included in CMake 2.6.0 would be, nothing. Dunno there. I'm not seeing any downside to PCRE, so long as it's disambiguated from CMake's current regexes. Cheers, Brandon Van Every _______________________________________________ CMake mailing list CMake@cmake.org http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
