Otto Moerbeek <o...@drijf.net> wrote:
> Tradiotionally, { } pattersn are not part of awk re's.
>
> Posix added them, but we do not include them afaik. Gnu awk only accepts
> them if given an extra arg (--posix or --re-interval).
>
> I think this should be documented.
Although there is a clear theory about "regular expressions", I have the
impression that there is no standard syntax. One needs to read again and
again the documentation of programs that use them.
I am just missing a way to reference in a (f)lex action a previously
matched subexpression (like with \m in a substitution with ed).
Why is this? Because lex is so old? And what does people do in these
cases?
Rodrigo
