From: Eric Niebler (eric_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-11-17 20:14:17
Joel de Guzman wrote:
> I guess a question I'm more interested with is: is there an advantage
> in terms of speed with the statically bound vs. the dynamic bound scheme?
That's the theory. Initial results are looking promissing, but it's
> Also, what types of
> expressions can't the static syntax express and why. Or is it just a matter
> of diverging from the original ubiquitous RE syntax?
I don't expect there to be any RE constructs that cannot be expressed
statically. The challenge will be to find acceptable syntax.
> Finally, can we combine the two schemes?
If you mean, will I be able to nest a dynamically-bound regex within a
statically bound one, the answer is: I hope so! I haven't gotten around
to that yet, but it's on the short list.
-- Eric Niebler Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk