[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kfm-devel
Subject:    Re: Fwd: Regular expression library choices
From:       Michael Bedy <mjbedy () mediaone ! net>
Date:       2001-11-05 21:43:29
[Download RAW message or body]


  Hi,

  The problem is that we need to follow the Javascript spec as far as the
format of regular expressions go. It looks like (from a cursory glance at
the web page) the BOOST library leans more towards the POSIX syntax.
Unfortunatly, that's exactly what I am trying to get rid of by moving to
pcre.

  So, the library we are using is dictated by the JavaScript standard -
which happens to use Perl format regular expressions. Pcre provides an
implementation of perl regular expressions.

  Thanks,
     - Mike

P.S. I've got it working, but I'm still trying to figure out error
handling. Getting there, though.

On Mon, 5 Nov 2001, David Faure wrote:

>
> Hi,
>
> In case nobody forwarded this to you yet...
>
> ----------  Forwarded Message  ----------
>
> Subject: Regular expression library choices
> Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 12:29:04 -0500
> From: Rob Gillen <rgillen@webmd.net>
> To: KDE Development Mailing List <kde-devel@kde.org>
>
> It's been a while since I actively followed the mailing list here, but I
> just finished reading the most recent Kernel Cousin KDE and noticed the
> tidbit on regular expression library choices (PCRE and QRegex).  Has
> anyone considered using the native C++-developed Regex++ that is in the
> free Boost C++ library?  I've used this library before, and it is very
> fast, feature complete, extensible, and compatible with standard C++.
>
>    http://boost.org/libs/regex/index.htm
>
> If I sound like a commercial, I apologize only partly.  I don't want to
> burn bandwidth unnecessarily, but I am very picky about regular
> expressions and I've used quite a few different implementations.
>
> Rob
>
>
>

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]