Re: [Boost-users] [regex] - bk_parens and bk_bracesmissingfrom1.33.x

From: Keith MacDonald (boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-02-12 06:36:55

That makes sense, thanks.  I'll cut out those options and hope nobody 
complains!

- Keith MacDonald

"John Maddock" <john_at_[hidden]> wrote in message 
news:00d401c62fbc$e5bf6280$3e700252_at_fuji...
> OK understood, but if you use Basic-style syntax with Perl like extensions
> you can get into trouble particularly if you try and match non-greedy
> repeats POSIX style.  So, I guess what I'm saying is it avoid a whole lot 
> of
> confusion all round if you stick to one of the standard syntaxes or their
> variations:  basic, extended, perl, emacs etc.  My guess is your users 
> would
> find it less confusing as well - most people (all of them?) would want
> regexes that follow whatever form they've used before, rather than 
> inventing
> their own new syntax.
>
> You can still choose whether to use Perl-style matching or POSIX-style
> leftmost longest matching independently of the syntax type, but I'd 
> recomend
> that you don't, or at least that you don't try and use Perl syntax with
> leftmost-longest rules. The other way around however: POSIX syntax with 
> Perl
> matching rules is OK (and is more or less what emacs does).
>
> John.