DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3877>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3877 {n} and {n,m} not thread safe ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2002-08-30 15:12 ------- I was having the same problem while stress testing a new applications. Since it seemed a striaght foward issue of instances using static variables as a scratch pad and I had a good reproducable test. I decided to just change the variables from static to non-static as shown in the patch below and run the tests. All the errors went away and regexp seems to still do everything we expect of it with no loss of performance. 101,105c102,106 < static int brackets = 0; // Number of bracket sets < static int[] bracketStart = null; // Starting point < static int[] bracketEnd = null; // Ending point < static int[] bracketMin = null; // Minimum number of matches < static int[] bracketOpt = null; // Additional optional matches --- > int brackets = 0; // Number of bracket sets > int[] bracketStart = null; // Starting point > int[] bracketEnd = null; // Ending point > int[] bracketMin = null; // Minimum number of matches > int[] bracketOpt = null; // Additional optional matches -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
