https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93502
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Nadav Har'El from comment #2) > Maybe you mean it is a dup of > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86164 ? Yes that's what I was thinking of. > But I'm not sure. I honestly don't understand the conclusion there that ".*" > is implemented recursively. Why would such a simple case, easily converted > to a deterministic finite automaton with no memory usage at all - need > recursion? Nobody said it *needs* recursion, that's just how it's implemented today.
