From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: erik quanstrom <quanstro@coraid.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2008 12:54:55 -0400
To: rudolf.sykora@gmail.com, 9fans@9fans.net
Message-ID: <bdbf08b7981d7deac25d204e5831aca8@coraid.com>
In-Reply-To: <a560a5d00810240911gee79793h966c6f325ce19f97@mail.gmail.com>
References: <a560a5d00810240108q62854ec1w16614c90c7071436@mail.gmail.com>
	<765ef13a653652d5fcef9001ff70f814@quanstro.net>
	<a560a5d00810240911gee79793h966c6f325ce19f97@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [9fans] non greedy regular expressions
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 26323266-ead4-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

> Ok, so despite the documentation, some submatch tracking is there.
> But in all (?) your examples, as well as in the scripts you mentioned,
> this tracking is exclusively used with the s command (which is said to
> be unnecessary at least in sam/acme). If I try sth. like
> /( b(.)b)/a/\1\2/

this is covered in the sam paper in the section where pike
discusses s.

> Further, in R. Cox's text (http://swtch.com/~rsc/regexp/regexp1.html)
> he claims that all nice features except for backreferences can be
> implemented with Thomson's NFA algorithm. And even the backreferences
> can be handled gracefully somehow. That is: ALL: non-greedy operators,
> generalized assertions, counted repetitions, character classes CAN be
> processed using the fast algorithm. Why then we don't have it?

let me turn this around.  why would these additions (complications)
benefit plan 9?

- erik