From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Wolfgang_J=E4hrling?= [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 08:04:20 +0200
AFAIK, the glibc-people are rewriting the regex code for 2.3, because
the current implementation got unmaintainable and has various strange
limitations. This could be one of those.
From: Thien-Thi Nguyen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 16:29:40 -0700
i traced this to `regexec' (glibc 2.2.4) and stopped -- it's not a guile
bug after all, as far as i could tell. (also, could not reproduce the
behavior under FreeBSD 4.4-RELEASE.)
probably time to
Thien-Thi Nguyen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Thien-Thi Nguyen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 16:29:40 -0700
i traced this to `regexec' (glibc 2.2.4) and stopped -- it's not a guile
bug after all, as far as i could tell. (also, could not reproduce the
behavior
well, good and bad news.
the good news is that another guile project was recently added to the
projects list. the bad news is that for www.gnu.org, template.scm now
fails due to unfulfilled regexp matching. (this has resulted in an
empty project page there.) below is a test case that
On Thu, Apr 25, 2002 at 01:05:50PM -0700, Thien-Thi Nguyen wrote:
[...]
if someone can confirm similar behavior on another system (perhaps by
varying the appended string length), i will add this to the bugs db.
(i ask for this confirmation because my system's old sdrams are prone to
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 23:47:13 +0200
| guile (test ok)
| string-length 42 = ok
| guile (test (+space ok 11672))
| string-length 11714 = ok
| guile (test (+space ok 11673))
| string-length 11715 = ok
| guile (test (+space ok
Hmmm, never really used guile's regex heavily - that's where i
still use blushperl/blush.
If you want high-power regexps, you should resurrect the Rx interface,
grabbing the latest libhackerlab. In fact, rather than resurrecting
the old Guile Rx interface, you should grab and
