On 01/24/2011 01:57 PM, Jose E. Marchesi wrote:
>
> POSIX BREs and EREs
>
> And the GNU extensions that we should all be supporting by default
> :).
>
> Just to be sure. By importing the 'regex' gnulib module and including
> REG_EXTENDED in the cflags parameter of regcom
On 01/23/2011 05:27 PM, Karl Berry wrote:
> As an available-now alternative, James (Youngman) developed some
> automatically-generated Texinfo for each syntax for findutils. I'd
> suggest going that way for recutils. I don't remember why we never
> generated/imported/exported
POSIX BREs and EREs
And the GNU extensions that we should all be supporting by default
:).
Just to be sure. By importing the 'regex' gnulib module and including
REG_EXTENDED in the cflags parameter of regcomp we can be sure that we
are supporting the GNU extensions, righ
On 01/23/2011 05:27 PM, Karl Berry wrote:
> As an available-now alternative, James (Youngman) developed some
> automatically-generated Texinfo for each syntax for findutils. I'd
> suggest going that way for recutils. I don't remember why we never
> generated/imported/exported those docs in gnulib
I think it would be nice to make the regex module to import a texinfo
file documenting the supported regular expressions syntax
I agree in principle, but ...
We could get the "Regular Expression Syntax"
chapter in its own file regex-syntax.texi,
.. this isn't ideal as-is. Ther
Hi.
Recently someone noted that the recutils manual does not document the
flavor of the regular expressions accepted in selection expressions and
field type declarations.
I am using regcomp/regexec to implement those facilities, and have the
regex module imported from gnulib.
I think it would b
